OpenNews MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions default and max values for 'limit' but doesn't disclose other behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, response format, pagination, or error handling. For a search tool with no annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 appropriately sized with a clear purpose statement followed by parameter details in a structured 'Args:' section. It's front-loaded and efficient, though the parameter explanations could be slightly more integrated into the flow.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is moderately complete. It covers the basic purpose and parameters well but lacks details on behavioral aspects (e.g., response format, errors) and differentiation from siblings, leaving gaps for effective tool use.

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 compensate. It adds meaningful context for both parameters: 'coin' is explained with examples (e.g., 'BTC', 'ETH'), and 'limit' specifies default (10) and max (100) values. This significantly enhances understanding 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 clearly states the tool's purpose as 'Search news related to a specific cryptocurrency coin/token,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'search_news' or 'search_news_advanced,' which appear to be similar news search functions.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_news' or 'search_news_advanced' from the sibling list. It only states what the tool does without context about its specific use case compared to other news search tools.

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