sc_security_news

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as data recency, caching, pagination, authentication requirements, or error handling. For a news-fetching tool, agents need to know if results are real-time or delayed, and if there are rate limits.

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 short sentence that conveys the core purpose. It is front-loaded and concise, but the brevity leaves out important details. One could argue it is under-specified rather than efficiently concise, but it earns a 4 for clarity of purpose despite lacking depth.

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?

Given an output schema and no annotations, the description should compensate with behavioral and parameter details. It does not explain return format, news scope (e.g., how many articles), or caching. The tool has moderate complexity with two parameters, yet the description leaves gaps that an agent needs to guess.

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%, meaning the description must explain parameters. The description mentions 'by ISIN' but does not add meaning to the `locale` parameter beyond the schema defaults. The `locale` parameter is not explained, so agents may not know its purpose or valid values.

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 states 'Get latest news summary for a specific security by ISIN from Scalable Capital.' This specifies the verb (Get), resource (latest news summary), and scope (by ISIN). It clear enough to separate from most sibling tools, though sibling tools are heavily varied in domain, so differentiation is not critical.

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?

The context context implies that this tool should be used for retrieving news about a security, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like sc_quote or sc_search. No mentions of when not to use it or specific prerequisites.

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