search_stories

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It does disclose useful operational details like count default (20), max limit (100), and 0-indexed page numbers, but it does not describe response behavior, empty-result handling, or potential search caveats. This is adequate but not rich.

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 compact: a one-sentence purpose followed by a clean argument list. Every line provides useful information, with no redundant or filler content.

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 the output schema covers return values and the tool is relatively simple, the description is fairly complete. It covers pagination, sorting, and result count constraints. It lacks explicit sibling-tool guidance, but that is a usage-guidelines concern rather than a completeness gap here.

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 zero description coverage, but the description documents all four parameters. It adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema, especially count's max value and page's 0-indexing. Some entries like 'query: Search terms' are minimal, but overall it compensates well for the schema gap.

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 opens with 'Full-text search for HN stories', which clearly names the action (search) and the target resource (HN stories). This also differentiates it from siblings like search_comments, get_stories, and get_thread by resource type and search behavior.

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?

No explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_comments or get_stories. The intended use is implied by the word 'search' and the parameter list, but there are no clear exclusions or 'use this instead' hints.

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