dawn_headlines

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds useful context with 'fresh' and 'public', indicating recency and no authentication barrier, and 'returns' signals read-only behavior. However, it does not disclose output shape, pagination, limits, or error behavior, which would be valuable given there is no output schema.

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 short and front-loaded, with the key action in the first sentence. The second sentence repeats the word 'headlines' and adds only 'fresh' and 'public,' which is slightly redundant but still useful and not padded.

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 one-parameter tool with an enum, the description and schema together are sufficient to make a call: the section is required and its valid values are provided. However, because there is no output schema, the description does not clarify what a 'headline' entry contains or how results are returned, leaving minor but real ambiguity.

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%, and the single parameter 'section' is fully enumerated in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema; it only restates that headlines come from one Dawn section, so the baseline 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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get Dawn section headlines') and adds scope ('one public Dawn section'), so an agent knows what the tool returns. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like dawn_article or dawn_sections by name and intent, but it does not explicitly contrast itself with any alternative.

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 implies when to use the tool: whenever fresh headlines from a Dawn section are needed. It provides no when-not guidance or alternatives, such as pointing to dawn_article for full article content or dawn_sections for the list of available sections, leaving usage context to inference.

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