news_brief

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and discloses important behavior: the brief is generated by a background refresher on a ~20h cadence rather than on demand. It does not cover authentication, rate limits, or whether the detail parameter changes freshness or format.

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 compact and front-loaded: it first defines the brief and its contents, then adds cadence and routing guidance. Every sentence contributes useful context without waste.

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 retrieval tool with an output schema, the description sufficiently explains what is returned, how fresh it is, and when to use alternatives. The main remaining gap is the unexplained optional 'detail' parameter.

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 single optional parameter 'detail' has 0% schema description coverage and is not mentioned in the description at all. The description therefore provides no semantic guidance about accepted values, default behavior, or how 'detail' affects the returned brief.

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 states a specific resource and output shape: the latest assembled morning brief containing top stories per category plus a synthesis paragraph. It clearly distinguishes this cached brief from fresher per-story detail via news_analysis or the edition route.

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?

It explains that the brief is built on a ~20h cadence and is not on-demand, and it names alternatives for freshest per-story detail. The guidance is clear, though it does not explicitly frame use cases such as when an agent should prefer this over other brief-like siblings.

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