get_stories_by_id

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic purpose, such as error handling for invalid IDs, rate limits, or the fact that multiple stories are fetched at once via the story_ids array. It does not contradict the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, focused sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is entirely front-loaded and earns each word. This is an appropriate size for a simple read operation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Although annotations and an output schema are provided, the description is insufficient for an agent to confidently select this tool among nine story-related siblings. It lacks usage guidelines and parameter clarity, which are critical given the presence of similar tools like get_all_stories and get_peer_stories. The tool's complexity is low, but the description fails to convey its unique applicability.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description only hints at 'by their id' which maps to story_ids, but does not explain the purpose of the 'peer' parameter. Since coverage is low, the description should compensate by explaining both parameters, but it only partially covers one, leaving the agent without sufficient semantic understanding.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Получить конкретные истории по их id.' clearly identifies the tool's purpose as retrieving specific stories by their IDs, using a specific verb ('Получить') and resource ('истории'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_all_stories, get_peer_stories, and get_pinned_stories, which have broader or different scopes.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where one would prefer get_peer_stories over this, nor does it give any exclusions or prerequisites. The only implied usage is from the tool name and schema, but no explicit context is provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.