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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the 24-hour time window, newest-first ordering, and optional category filter. However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens when no news is available. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no redundant information. Every sentence adds value: time range, optional scoping, ordering, and usage examples.

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 tool's simplicity (3 optional parameters, no required) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, scope, ordering, and common use cases. It could slightly improve by mentioning that 'limit' controls the number of returned posts, but overall it is nearly 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 description coverage is 0%, but the description explains only the 'category' parameter ('Optionally scoped to a category'). It does not explain 'lang' or 'limit' beyond what the schema defaults provide. For a tool with 3 parameters, this is insufficient compensation.

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 tool gets the latest news from the last 24 hours, ordered newest-first, with optional category scoping. It provides concrete example queries ('what's new today?', 'what happened in DeFi today?') and distinguishes itself from siblings like get_breaking and get_digest through time scope and ordering.

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 gives explicit usage scenarios ('Use for what's new today? or what happened in DeFi today?') and mentions optional category scoping. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternative tools, but the context is clear enough for most agents.

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