deadline_news

Does 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 source ('public RSS feed') and that results are 'fresh top stories', but it does not disclose potential rate limits, pagination, ordering, or the structure of the returned data. This is a minimal behavioral picture for a tool that returns a feed.

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 two sentences and efficiently front-loads the core purpose ('Get Deadline top stories') before providing the RSS feed context. It wastes no words and is appropriately sized for a simple tool. It could potentially add usage guidance but remains concise.

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 there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the tool returns in sufficient detail. It only says 'Returns fresh Deadline Hollywood Entertainment top stories', which is vague about the output format (e.g., list of objects, fields like title, link, description). It also lacks any mention of limitations or specific behavior, making it incomplete for an agent needing to process the result.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description adds context about the output (top stories) but doesn't need to elaborate on parameters. With 0 parameters, the baseline is 4, and no information is missing.

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 Deadline top stories') and adds context about it being fresh entertainment top stories from a public RSS feed. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like deadline_article (specific article) and deadline_author (author search), though it doesn't explicitly name those alternatives. It is not tautological and gives a clear functional purpose.

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 like deadline_headlines, deadline_sections, or deadline_article. There is no mention of exclusions or conditions that would point an agent to choose this tool. Usage context is only implied by the name ('top stories') rather than explicitly stated.

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