yahoo_finance_ticker_news

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only states that the tool returns news results, but does not mention any side effects, rate limits, authentication needs, or other behaviors. The description is too minimal to be transparent.

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 very concise, consisting of two short sentences. It front-loads the purpose without any fluff. While it could be slightly more informative, it earns points for efficiency.

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 and no output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It doesn't explain the structure of the returned news items or any other contextual details. The parameter schema is complete, but the description could be more helpful by describing the return format or including a note about the data source.

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 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any further meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema already says (e.g., 'symbol' is a Yahoo Finance symbol, 'count' is news result count, 'tab' specifies a tab). No additional nuance or examples are provided.

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 clearly states that the tool returns Yahoo Finance news search results for a symbol. It uses a specific verb ('returns') and resource ('Yahoo Finance news search results'). Among the many yahoo_finance_* sibling tools, this one is clearly about news, distinguishing it from tools like yahoo_finance_ticker_info or yahoo_finance_ticker_quote.

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, nor any prerequisites or contexts. It simply describes what it does without indicating when it is appropriate or inappropriate to use.

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