get_latest_news

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does reasonably well: it discloses parameter defaults and limits (limit max 1000, include_url default False to save tokens), clarifies the return format as JSON, and adds agent-facing display guidance (show all data by default, only summarize on explicit request). It does not mention rate limits, error behavior, or auth, but this is a simple read-style fetch.

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 front-loaded with the primary action and then uses compact sections for Args, Returns, and display suggestions. It is slightly longer than the minimum, but every section earns its place, especially the display guidance which is directly actionable.

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?

With three fully explained parameters and an output schema present, the description gives an agent enough to invoke the tool correctly. It even adds useful presentation context. The main gap is not distinguishing this tool from several news-related siblings, but the name and opening line supply the core context.

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%, so the description must fully compensate. It does: each parameter is explained with examples and defaults ('platforms' with ['zhihu','weibo'], 'limit' with max 1000, 'include_url' with token-saving rationale). This adds clear meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 opens with a clear verb-resource statement ('获取最新一批爬取的新闻数据', get the latest batch of crawled news data) and indicates the purpose of quickly surveying hot topics. It is clear about what the tool does, but it does not contrast with siblings like get_latest_rss, get_news_by_date, or search_news, so it only earns a 4, not 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 phrase '快速了解当前热点' implies the tool is for a quick look at current news, and the display suggestions instruct the agent on presentation behavior. However, there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as get_news_by_date or search_news, nor any exclusions.

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