Purdue Exponent student newspaper

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Articles from' and 'public feed', which hints at a list of recent articles but does not specify pagination, ordering, rate limits, or whether it returns full text or summaries. The behavior regarding the limit parameter (e.g., how many total articles exist) is unaddressed.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the main resource and topics. Minor redundancy with the title ('student newspaper' appears in both). Nearly perfect, but could be slightly tighter.

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?

Despite low complexity (2 optional parameters, no nested objects), the description fails to hint at the return format (full articles, summaries, titles), which is critical since no output schema exists. The absence of annotations and behavioral details leaves the agent underinformed for invocation and response handling.

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?

The input schema covers both parameters (limit and section) with descriptions (defaults, min/max, enum values). The description adds no new meaning beyond listing some topics that may correspond to sections, but does not clarify what each enum value contains. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool provides articles from the Purdue Exponent, an independent student newspaper, and lists specific topics (campus reporting, student government, local news, sports coverage). It distinguishes from sibling tools like purdue_news by emphasizing editorial independence and the specific source (purdueexponent.org).

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 implies usage for student newspaper content versus official university news (via the 'editorially independent' phrase), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like purdue_news or athletics_sports. No guidance on parameter selection (limit, section) or when not to use is provided.

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