scienceon_weekly_news

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, indicating safe read-only operation. Description adds that news is curated with high reliability ('신뢰성 높은') and grouped by week, but does not disclose response format or pagination. No contradiction.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the main verb '조회합니다'. Compact and to the point, though it could mention usage alternatives for clarity.

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?

With an output schema and full parameter coverage, the description is minimally adequate. It lacks details on result structure or edge cases, but the tool is straightforward. Sibling context suggests broader scienceon family, but no need for deep context.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters well. Description adds that the date selects the week containing that date, which is helpful context, but otherwise does not need to compensate.

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 retrieves weekly science/technology news ('금주의 과학기술뉴스를 조회합니다'). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on weekly news, unlike paper/patent/report tools, but does not explicitly contrast with news_trend tools.

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 fetching weekly news but does not explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives like scienceon_news_trends. It provides context about '주차별' but no exclusion criteria.

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