web_get_deal_articles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'abrufen' implies a read-only operation, and the workflow reference adds context. However, it does not explicitly state side-effect-free behavior, auth requirements, or empty/error cases, which would be more transparent.

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 sentence that front-loads the action and object, with a concise parenthetical giving the critical dependency. Every word earns its place; there is no filler or redundancy.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description adequately covers the resource, the parameter source, and the workflow. It omits pagination or limit details, but those are not essential for this simple retrieval tool.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description compensates by telling the agent that campaign_id comes from web_get_deal_campaigns. This adds essential meaning beyond the bare string type, although it does not describe format or validation.

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 uses a specific verb ('abrufen') and a specific resource ('Artikel einer einzelnen Aktionsangebote-Kampagne'), clearly indicating this tool retrieves articles for one promotional campaign. It distinguishes itself from siblings like web_get_deal_campaigns (campaign list), web_get_article (single article), and web_search_articles (search).

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 parenthetical 'campaign_id aus web_get_deal_campaigns' explicitly points the agent to the upstream tool for obtaining the required parameter, establishing a clear usage workflow. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives, but the context is sufficient for correct routing.

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