Build a daily digest

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read nature is covered. The description adds the behavioral trait that this is the 'heaviest action' and counts more against rate limits, which is useful beyond annotations. No contradiction detected.

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 consists of two concise sentences with no wasted words. Every sentence adds value: explaining the action, warning about rate limits, and giving a usage example.

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?

The description covers the main purpose, usage, and rate limit impact. However, it does not explain the return format (e.g., are returned articles full text or summaries?) or clarify 'top-N' criteria (e.g., by popularity). Given that output schema is absent, these gaps reduce completeness.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description must explain parameters. It mentions 'top-N articles', 'selected verticals', and 'requested window', mapping to limit, verticals, and window. However, it does not list the enum values or provide specifics about each parameter, leaving the agent to infer details from the schema alone.

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 top-N articles across selected verticals for a window. The verb 'aggregate' and resource 'articles across verticals' is specific. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'get_article' or 'get_vertical_briefing', the phrase 'read me today's tech news' gives strong usage context, making the purpose clear.

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 explicit usage guidance with 'Use this for 'read me today's tech news' style prompts' and warns about rate limit impact ('Heaviest action — counts more against the per-agent rate limit'). However, it does not specify when not to use it or mention alternative tools for different scenarios.

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