news_editor_file_review

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does so: it discloses the backend was shut down and returns 410 Gone, which is the critical behavioral fact preventing wasted calls. It loses a point only because the trailing 'Tip: call earning_opportunities' is unrelated to this tool and reads as noise rather than disclosure.

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 deprecation warning and migration path are well front-loaded, but the appended 'Tip: call earning_opportunities to see how to put your assets to work' is unrelated to this tool and does not earn its place in the definition.

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?

For a deprecated, zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides everything an agent needs: it must not be invoked, why, and which tools to use instead. Nothing actionable is missing.

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 tool takes zero parameters (empty properties object, 100% coverage), so there is nothing for the description to clarify; the baseline for a 0-param tool applies.

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 names the resource and the former action ('file an editor review via the aibtc.news API') and immediately marks it as non-functional, so an agent knows both what it was and that it must not be called. It is unambiguously differentiated from live siblings like news_editor_review_signal.

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?

States an explicit prohibition ('⛔ DEPRECATED — do not use') and names the concrete replacement path (legion_get_story, legion_vote, starting with legion_status). This is exactly the when-not/alternatives guidance the dimension rewards.

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