get_source_news

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Latest stories' hints at recency ordering, but it says nothing about how the days window behaves, default ordering, pagination/limit behavior, or what happens for an unknown outlet name.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the examples earn their place by showing the expected outlet-name format.

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?

No output schema, no annotations, and two of three parameters undocumented. For a data-retrieval tool an agent needs at minimum the time-window and result-count semantics, and neither is provided.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, yet it only clarifies the 'source' parameter via examples. The 'days' (default 7) and 'limit' (default 10) parameters are never mentioned, leaving their semantics entirely to the bare type/default.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: fetching the latest stories from a single named outlet, with concrete examples ('Sifted', 'Tech.eu', 'Heise'). The 'one outlet by name' scope implicitly separates it from topic-based siblings like get_top_eu_tech_news and search_europe_tech_news, though no sibling is named.

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?

No indication of when to prefer this over search_europe_tech_news or get_europe_tech_news, nor any prerequisites (e.g. whether the outlet name must come from list_sources). Usage must be inferred entirely from the one-line purpose.

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