get_story_metadata

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does convey a useful behavioral trait—this operation avoids loading full story content—but it doesn't mention whether it is a safe read, any error behavior, authorization requirements, or the shape of the returned metadata.

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 one short sentence with no filler. The key scoping phrase 'without loading full content' earns its place by differentiating from get_story and reinforces the metadata-only intent.

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 simple one-parameter read tool, the description is mostly usable, but with no output schema and no annotation coverage, it should clarify what metadata is returned or how it relates to other story retrieval tools. It is adequate but leaves meaningful gaps around return values and usage boundaries.

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 does not mention 'storyId' or add any meaning beyond the parameter name. The parameter is self-explanatory to some degree, but the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema-level guidance.

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 clear verb-resource pair ('Get story metadata') and adds the scope 'without loading full content', which distinguishes it from the sibling get_story. It is not a tautology and names the key intended outcome, though it doesn't explicitly enumerate what qualifies as 'metadata'.

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 phrase 'without loading full content' implies this tool is for metadata-only lookups, which gives some context for when to use it. However, it never explicitly names the alternative nor states when not to use it (e.g., when full story content or sections are needed).

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