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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds the meaningful temporal constraint 'up to 1 year back' and names the underlying REST endpoint, but it does not disclose rate limits, authentication requirements, pagination, or the shape of returned news items.

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 short sentences with zero filler; the core purpose and temporal limitation are front-loaded before the REST endpoint reference. Every element earns its place.

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 read-only, three-parameter tool with complete schema coverage and no output schema, the description supplies the purpose, date-range scope, and endpoint needed to invoke it correctly. It could still mention what the news payload contains or how results are ordered, but the essentials are covered.

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 100%, and the schema itself documents symbol, from, and to with formats and patterns. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb (retrieve news), resource (company news), and scope (for a symbol over a date range, up to 1 year back), which is clear and actionable. It implicitly distinguishes itself from finnhub_market_news by requiring a symbol, but never names the sibling alternative explicitly, keeping it short of a 5.

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 no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and never names the obvious alternative, finnhub_market_news. The requirement of a symbol is a weak implicit hint that this is company-specific rather than general market news, but nothing routes the agent between the two tools.

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