get-news-by-type

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Get news articles' implies a read-only operation, but there's no information about authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior (beyond what the schema shows), error conditions, or response format. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic operation.

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 at just 6 words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and wastes no words. Every word earns its place, making it easy for an agent to quickly understand the basic function.

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 has 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the different news types mean (handpicked, trending, etc.), how results are returned, or any behavioral characteristics. For a filtering tool with multiple parameter options and no structured output documentation, the description should provide more context about the filtering mechanism and expected results.

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 100%, so the schema already fully documents all three parameters with descriptions and enum values. The description mentions 'based on a type' which aligns with the 'type' parameter but adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides. With complete schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get news articles based on a type' clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'news articles', but it's vague about what 'based on a type' means. It doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling 'get-news', which appears to be a more general news retrieval tool. The purpose is understandable but lacks specificity about the filtering mechanism.

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. There's no mention of sibling tools like 'get-news' or 'get-news-by-id', nor any context about when type-based filtering is appropriate versus other filtering methods. The agent receives no usage context beyond the basic purpose statement.

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