add_article

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses meaningful behaviors: it fetches, extracts, saves, and rejects private/local network targets. However, it does not mention side effects such as duplicate handling, idempotency, or whether the saved article can be overwritten.

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?

Two crisp sentences with no filler. The main verb phrase 'Fetch, extract, and save' is front-loaded, and the important security constraint is stated clearly and briefly.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the core operation and the key constraint adequately. It misses explicit sibling routing and deeper side-effect details, but the presence of an output schema and the simple parameter model make the description largely complete.

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% and the URL parameter already has a helpful description. The tool description adds extra semantics by clarifying that the URL must be user-provided, public, and exactly one, and by stating that private and local network targets are rejected.

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 the action: fetch, extract, and save one user-provided public article URL. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like save_content_idea or save_content_asset by specifying the exact resource and the public-URL requirement.

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 implies usage: use this when the user provides a public article URL to save. It also gives an exclusion by rejecting private and local network targets, but it does not explicitly mention sibling tools or conditions for choosing an alternative.

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