x_api_get_news

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It thoroughly covers read-only risk, required OAuth/bearer permissions, environment-selection behavior for tenant scopes, common failure conditions, and a safety warning about sensitive data in responses. This is exceptional transparency.

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 well-structured with labeled sections, making it scannable. However, 'Use when: Get news stories by ID' is a verbatim repeat of the opening sentence, wasting one line. Otherwise, every section adds meaningful information.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description provides the expected response shape, common failure conditions, required permissions, environment behavior, and related tools. For a 7-parameter tool with no annotations, this is remarkably complete.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description compensates by explaining id (path, required) and detailing scopeTenantId/scopeUserId/scopeAccountId selection behavior plus credentialKey profile selection. However, authorizationKey and preferredAuthType receive no explanation, and id's 'unknown' type is unhelpful. Most critical parameters are covered, but gaps remain.

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 opens with 'Get news stories by ID', clearly identifying the action (get) and resource (news stories by ID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like x_api_search_news and other get-by-id variants for different resources.

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?

Explicit 'Use when' and 'Do not use when' sections provide clear guidance, including alternatives like x_schema_discovery and x_query_suggestion for exploration. It also lists recommended prerequisite and follow-up tools, giving strong contextual direction.

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