List Author Articles

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing default behavior (RSS), approximate result count (~10 recent articles), full content availability, and potential bot detection with scraping. It could add more on return format or edge cases, but the disclosed traits are valuable.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by essential source-selection guidance. Every sentence earns its place without 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 tool with four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the core usage and behavioral trade-offs. It does not explicitly explain the keyword filtering or limit behavior, but the schema covers those details, so the description is adequately complete for typical use.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning to the 'source' parameter by explaining its practical trade-offs (fast vs. slower, risk of bot detection) beyond the enum descriptions, and clarifies that the default RSS mode provides full article content.

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 it retrieves articles from a Medium author, with a specific verb ('Get a list') and resource ('articles from a Medium author'). It differentiates from sibling tools like search_author_articles and read_article by its listing scope and source options.

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 clear context on choosing between RSS and scrape sources, including trade-offs in speed, article count, and bot detection risk. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over sibling alternatives like search_author_articles, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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