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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses only that a full article body is returned; it says nothing about authentication, error behavior for an unknown id, or whether the body is truncated or paginated.

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?

A single short sentence that front-loads the return value and the key. Nothing is wasted, though the sentence fragment style leaves room for a clarifying clause about behavior.

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?

The tool is simple (one required id, no output schema, no annotations), and the description covers the core contract. It stops short of anything an agent would want at call time, such as what happens with an invalid or missing id and whether the caller must be authenticated.

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?

There is one parameter with 0% schema description coverage, and the description does add the fact that the id is numeric, which is the only semantic detail available. It adds little beyond the schema's integer type, but for a single-key lookup that is close to sufficient.

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 names the resource (news article) and what is returned (the full article body), plus the keying input (numeric id). That is enough to distinguish it in spirit from the sibling list_news, which returns listings rather than a single full body, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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 when-to-use guidance and no routing to alternatives. The obvious alternative, list_news, is present among siblings but is never mentioned, nor is any condition for choosing a single fetch over a list.

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