Retrieve cryptocurrency news sources from the CoinStats API to access financial market information and portfolio tracking data.
Get news sources.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "get-news-sources"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Input schema / $schemaAdded value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +falseInput schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Input schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -falseDoes the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action 'Get news sources' without detailing whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires authentication, what the output format might be, or any rate limits. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation coverage.
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 a single sentence 'Get news sources.', which is concise but under-specified. While it avoids unnecessary words, it fails to provide essential context that would help an agent, making it more of an under-description than efficient brevity.
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 complexity of news-related tools (with siblings like 'get-news' and 'get-news-by-type'), the description is incomplete. It lacks output schema, and with no annotations, it does not explain what 'news sources' means, how they are returned, or how this tool fits into the broader context, leaving significant gaps for agent understanding.
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 tool has 0 parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100%, so there is no need for parameter details in the description. The baseline for this scenario is 4, as the description does not need to compensate for any parameter documentation gaps.
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 sources' restates the tool name 'get-news-sources' almost verbatim, making it tautological. It specifies the verb 'Get' and resource 'news sources' but lacks detail about what 'news sources' entails or how it differs from sibling tools like 'get-news' or 'get-news-by-type', leaving the purpose vague.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get-news' or 'get-news-by-type'. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction on appropriate usage scenarios.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.