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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions output content (headlines, snippets, URLs) but does not disclose behavior such as pagination handling, default limits, date filtering semantics, or any rate limits. This leaves important behavioral traits unaddressed.

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 core purpose. Every sentence adds value, and there is no filler or redundant information.

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 simple read-only news tool with fully documented optional parameters, the description is fairly complete. It states the purpose, source variety, and key output fields. It does not explicitly explain pagination or default behaviors, but the schema already covers parameter details, so this is not a major gap.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of the parameters with clear descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides, so it does not raise the score above the baseline.

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 accesses the latest general news articles from a variety of sources via the FMP General News API, and it lists the obtained elements (headlines, snippets, URLs). This distinguishes it from sibling news tools that focus on stock, crypto, or forex news.

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 phrase 'general news' implies when the tool should be used, but there is no explicit guidance about alternatives or exclusions. The description does not mention that for asset-specific news, users should use sibling tools like getStockNews, getCryptoNews, or getForexNews.

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