get_news

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds the distinction between symbol and market modes but does not elaborate on pagination, rate limits, or data completeness. Given the annotations, the description provides adequate but not rich additional behavioral context.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence followed by a strategy tag and an example. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, uses tags for structure, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence provides value.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 optional parameters, no required params), the description covers the necessary context: what the tool does, how to use parameters, and an example. An output schema exists, so return values are not required. The tool is well-defined for an AI agent to select and invoke.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden for parameter semantics. It explains that 'symbol' is optional and that leaving it empty fetches market headlines, and 'count' defaults to 10. It also includes an example with a concrete symbol format. This adds meaningful semantic value beyond the 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 'Get news for a symbol or market,' specifying the action and the two distinct modes (symbol-specific or market headlines). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_news_search' which likely searches news.

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 includes a 'strategy' tag that explicitly instructs when to provide a symbol (for stock news) and when to leave it empty (for market headlines). It also provides an example. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives but gives clear context for use.

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