Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• search_newsB
  3.3/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only restates the search functionality. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as result ordering, scope (global vs. filtered), or output structure (though output schema exists).

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every element is necessary and clear.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It does not address how it relates to sibling tools, nor does it clarify search scope or behavior beyond the literal function.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema provides 100% coverage of parameter descriptions, so the tool description does not need to repeat them. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, matching the baseline of 3 for full schema coverage.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states a specific verb ('search') and resource ('news articles'), and the keyword mechanism distinguishes it from sibling tools that fetch by section or recency. This gives the agent a precise understanding of what the tool does.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  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 search_news versus get_latest_news, get_news_by_ressort, etc. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned; the usage context is left entirely to inference.

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

• get_latest_newsA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get the latest news' with no details on sorting, time windows, or potential pagination. While not misleading, it fails to specify any behaviors beyond the basic retrieval intent.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single concise sentence of six words, immediately stating the core action and subject. No filler or redundancy. For a tool with one parameter, this level of brevity is appropriate.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The tool is simple with an output schema covering return structure and a single parameter. However, the description omits any context about what constitutes 'latest', how the limit is applied, or any access constraints. Sufficient for basic use but lacking in depth for a fully informed agent.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% for the single 'limit' parameter with a clear description. The tool description adds no further parameter explanation, so it does not surpass the schema's contribution. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('latest news from Tagesschau'). It is unambiguous and implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like search_news or get_news_by_ressort, which serve different needs.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage for retrieving current top news items, but does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives (e.g., search_news for queries, get_regional_news for locations). No exclusions or alternative references are provided.

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

• get_news_by_ressortA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the basic purpose with no disclosure of return format, pagination, error behavior, or authentication needs. The read-only nature is implied by 'Get' but not made explicit or expanded upon.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence that front-loads the core action and resource. It is concise with no redundant words, and every part directly contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The output schema exists and parameters are well documented, covering return values and input details. However, the description lacks usage guidance relative to sibling tools and does not mention any behavioral constraints. For a simple get tool it is near-complete, but the missing sibling differentiation and behavioral context prevent a higher score.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The schema provides 100% description coverage for both parameters, so the schema already explains 'ressort' and 'limit'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond restating 'ressort/category', which is already in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'news' and a clear filter 'by ressort/category'. It differentiates from sibling tools like get_latest_news (which suggests unfiltered latest news) and search_news (which suggests keyword-based search) by specifying a category filter.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The context implies using this tool when news needs to be filtered by a category, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement or mention of alternatives. The sibling names provide some clues, but the description itself offers no direct guidance on choosing this tool over others.

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

• get_regional_newsA
  3.6/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only restates the tool's purpose and does not disclose ordering, pagination, default behavior, or any constraints beyond what the schema already covers. The description adds minimal behavioral context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  A single, concise sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose. No superfluous words or redundant information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the simple nature of the tool, the rich parameter schema (100% coverage), and the presence of an output schema, the description is nearly sufficient. It communicates the core purpose and geographic scope, though it misses explicit guidance on when to use it versus siblings.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, and each parameter already has detailed descriptions including the region_id mapping. The description's mention of 'specific German state' reinforces region_id's purpose but adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description uses a specific verb ('Get') with a clear resource ('regional news') and scope ('specific German state'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like get_latest_news and get_news_by_ressort by focusing on regional/state-based filtering.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Usage context is implied: 'regional news' suggests using this tool for state-specific news, while siblings cover latest, category, or search. However, no explicit guidance is given on when to prefer this over alternatives, and no exclusions are mentioned.

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

• get_channelsA
  4/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It implies a read-only operation (get information) but does not disclose details such as return format, possible empty results, or whether livestream availability is dynamic. The existence of an output schema somewhat mitigates the lack of return-value details.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource. No redundancy or filler; every word contributes to understanding.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a zero-parameter read-only tool, the description is largely complete. It conveys the core purpose and distinguishes from siblings. The output schema likely covers return values. Minor gap: no mention of whether the channel list varies by region or time, which could be relevant.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The tool has zero parameters, so the description need not explain parameter meanings. The schema is empty and the description accurately reflects that no input is required. This is the baseline 4 for a no-parameter tool.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the specific resource 'available Tagesschau channels and livestreams.' This distinguishes it from sibling news-content tools (get_latest_news, search_news, etc.) because it targets channel/livestream metadata rather than articles.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies when to use the tool (when channel/livestream information is needed) but provides no explicit guidance about alternatives or exclusion scenarios. It does not mention sibling tools or contrast with news retrieval.

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