yahoo_tech_home

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

The description clarifies that this is a read-only feed operation and states what each returned story contains. With no annotations present, it does not disclose freshness, ordering, pagination, rate limits, or failure behavior, but for a zero-parameter homepage feed it adds meaningful context.

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 brief and front-loaded, stating the key value proposition first and then delivering the needed field details. Both sentences are informative, with no wasted wording.

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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description gives enough to call and understand the response shape by listing the four return fields. It does not fully cover details like feed ordering, update cadence, or response container format, but those are less essential for a simple zero-input feed.

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 and the description does not introduce any. Since there are no parameters to disambiguate, the description adequately confirms that the tool simply returns the current homepage feed.

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 identifies the resource (Yahoo Tech's homepage) and the operation (returns the editorial story stream). It lists the exact fields returned (title, destination URL, category, thumbnail), and the phrase 'homepage story stream' establishes what makes it distinct from sibling article/category tools.

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?

There is no explicit mention of when to use this tool versus alternatives like yahoo_tech_article or yahoo_tech_category. The usage context is implied but the description provides no yes/no criteria, exclusions, or alternative tool guidance.

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