yahoo_sports_news

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It tells what the tool returns (news articles with fields) and that it uses a server-rendered page, which implies no external API. However, it doesn't disclose any limitations, such as potential pagination, rate limits, or that the news may be from a specific region or language. It also doesn't mention if the tool is read-only (which is safe to assume) or if there are any side effects.

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, relatively short paragraph that front-loads the core purpose ('Yahoo Sports league news. Returns recent news articles...') and then dives into the enum list. The enum list is long but necessary; it could be more concise by pointing to the schema, but it's not overly verbose. Every sentence serves a purpose: explaining the output and the accepted values.

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 simple single-parameter tool that returns news articles, the description is fairly complete. It specifies the output fields and the available league values. However, it doesn't mention any output schema (since none exists), so an agent doesn't know the exact structure of the response beyond the stated fields. It also lacks details on error handling, pagination, or filtering, but given the simplicity, it's mostly sufficient.

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 schema has 100% coverage with a description 'League key' and an extensive enum. The description lists the enum values in full, which adds clarity beyond the schema by enumerating them, though the schema already includes them. However, the description doesn't explain how the league key maps to a specific news page (e.g., formatting differences), but given the schema is comprehensive, a 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 that the tool returns recent news articles for a league from Yahoo Sports' news page, and specifies the fields included (title, summary, author, published time, link). It clearly identifies the resource (league news) and the action (returns articles), distinguishing it from generic news tools. However, it doesn't explicitly compare to siblings like 'yahoo_sports_golf_leaderboard' or 'yahoo_sports_tennis_schedule', but the league enum makes its scope clear.

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 that this tool is for fetching news for a specific league, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like 'yahoo_sports_team' (which might provide team-specific news) or 'yahoo_sports_scoreboard'. There is no mention of exclusions or alternatives, but the league enum covers many leagues, and the tool's purpose is clear enough for an agent to infer when to use it.

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