get_news_by_category

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'aggregates news from predefined sources', but does not disclose whether the operation is safe, idempotent, or involves external API calls. No information on rate limits, authentication, or side effects is given.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence and a clear bullet-like listing of parameters. Every word serves a purpose, and there is no redundant information. The structure prioritizes key information upfront.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the essential purpose and parameter details. However, it lacks completeness regarding the output format, behavior when no results are found, and the nature of the 'predefined sources'. For a tool with siblings, it could benefit from brief disambiguation.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds significant meaning: it enumerates possible values for 'category' (tech, ai, general, business, crypto, science) and explains that 'max_per_feed' controls articles per feed with a default of 3. This goes beyond the schema's bare type declarations.

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 that the tool aggregates news from predefined sources for a given category, using the specific verb 'aggregiert' and resource 'Nachrichten aus vordefinierten Quellen einer Kategorie'. While it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_news_by_country, the category-focused purpose is evident from the name and description.

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. It lacks explicit context for when to prefer this over sibling tools like get_news_by_country or fetch_feed. The usage is only implied by the tool's name and description.

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