get_ai_news

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds useful context: it aggregates 15+ sources, returns a ranked list, and is free and auth-free. This complements annotations without contradicting them, though pagination or rate limits are not mentioned.

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 consists of two front-loaded sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose and outputs, the second adds context about aggregation and ease of use. No extraneous 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?

Given 3 parameters with full schema descriptions and no output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's function, inputs, and unique value (aggregation). It is complete for an agent to understand when and how to invoke it.

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 100%; all three parameters (category, limit, digest) are described in the input schema. The description only reiterates filterability by category, adding no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states the verb 'Get' and resource 'latest AI news from TensorFeed.ai', specifies outputs (title, source, URL, snippet, publish time) and filterability by category. It distinguishes from sibling tools (none of which are news-focused) by highlighting the unique aggregation function.

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 description explicitly states when to use: to get a consolidated feed of AI news from 15+ sources, avoiding the need to poll each outlet. It notes 'Free, no auth,' indicating ease of use. It does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but sibling tools are unrelated, so the context is clear.

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