get_latest_news

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: the default of platforms falls back to config.yaml, limit may return fewer items than requested, and include_url defaults to false to save tokens. It also notes that the data is crawled, which is useful context. No side effects or contradictions are present.

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 starts with a concise purpose sentence, then clearly separates Args, Returns, and an 'Important' section. It is somewhat lengthy due to display suggestions, but the structure is logical and front-loaded. Every section serves a purpose, though the display advice could be condensed.

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?

The description covers parameter handling, return type, and provides practical usage advice. Given that an output schema exists, it need not detail every field of the returned news items. It lacks explicit error handling or rate limit information, but for a read-only 'get' tool, it is sufficiently 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?

The description thoroughly explains each parameter: platforms (list of IDs, default to config, includes Chinese names), limit (default 50, max 1000, may return fewer), and include_url (default false, token saving). With 0% schema coverage, this fully compensates and adds significant meaning beyond the input schema.

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 tool's function: '获取最新一批爬取的新闻数据' (get the latest batch of crawled news data). It specifies the resource (latest news) and the action (get), but it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like get_news_by_date or search_news, though the 'latest' qualifier implies a difference.

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 implies usage for quickly understanding current hot topics ('快速了解当前热点'), which suggests when to use it. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as get_news_by_date or search_news, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance. The guidance provided is more about data display than tool selection.

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