yahoo_news_category

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that this is a read-style feed retrieval, lists exactly what each result contains, and explains that the data is sourced from Yahoo News's own server-rendered section pages. It does not mention pagination, rate limits, or auth, but it provides notably more behavioral context than a one-line description would.

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 compact and front-loaded. It names the resource, describes the return payload, and notes the underlying source in only two sentences, with no filler.

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 feed tool, the description is largely sufficient: it explains the resource and the return fields even without an output schema. The main gap is that it never provides example category values or clarifies how to determine valid Yahoo News section names.

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 baseline is 3. The description mostly repeats the 'Yahoo News section' concept in prose and does not add meaningful detail beyond the schema, such as valid category names or formatting expectations.

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 clear, specific operation: it returns a Yahoo News section's story stream and enumerates the expected output fields (title, destination URL, summary, source, publish time, comment count, thumbnails). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like yahoo_news_home, yahoo_news_article, and yahoo_news_comments.

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 intended use is clear: access the story stream for a Yahoo News section/category. It does not explicitly name when not to use it or alternative tools, but the section-level framing is distinctive enough that an agent can infer the right context.

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