redmine_news_create

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the HTTP method and two POST endpoints but does not describe side effects, authorization requirements, validation behavior, duplicate handling, or the response/error format.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every part earns its place: the action, the primary endpoint, and the alternative POST form with project identifier are all communicated efficiently.

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 annotations, no output schema, and a nested 'news' object that is essentially undocumented, this description is not complete enough to invoke the tool correctly. An agent can identify the endpoint but cannot construct the payload or anticipate results or errors without external knowledge.

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 description adds little beyond the schema: the schema already documents project_id as 'project id or identifier', and the description only repeats that idea. The required 'news' object has no schema description and no description-level explanation, leaving the agent without any clue about required fields or payload structure.

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 names the operation ('Create news') and gives exact endpoints, which makes its purpose evident among the news resource siblings. It does not explicitly contrast with redmine_news_update or other news tools, so sibling differentiation is implicit rather than stated.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like redmine_news_update or redmine_news_delete. The only usage signal is the verb 'Create' and the endpoint, with no mention of prerequisites, permissions, or when to prefer one POST form over the other.

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