list_articles

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

No annotations provided, so the description must cover all behavioral traits. It discloses that the tool returns a list without content, includes hidden articles marked as hidden:true, and explains client-side filtering and lack of server pagination. However, it does not explicitly state read-only or safety implications.

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 paragraph that efficiently conveys purpose, filtering, and limitations. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and avoids redundancy, though it could be slightly more structured.

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?

Given no output schema or annotations, the description adequately covers what the tool returns, how filtering works, pagination behavior, and the saveToFile feature. It lacks discussion of error handling or authentication, but for a simple list tool this is acceptable.

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 schema has 50% description coverage; the description adds value for 'tag' and 'query' by explaining they are case-insensitive filters and substring matching. It also clarifies the behavior of 'saveToFile' (writes full JSON to disk, returns summary in chat). The 'site' parameter is already described in the schema.

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 identifies the tool as a lightweight list of site articles, specifying the endpoint, returned fields, and distinguishing it from other tools like 'get_article' by noting the exclusion of content and updatedAt.

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 context for when to use filters (tag, query) and recommends using saveToFile for large sites. However, it does not explicitly compare with sibling tools or state when not to use this tool.

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