get_briefed

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's value lies beyond that. It adds behavioral details: credit cost, edge requirement, and output format (↳ lines). These are useful behavioral traits not covered by annotations.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: first sentence defines purpose, second sentence elaborates output format, third sentence states prerequisites and cost. It is concise and front-loaded with essential 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 no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does, how it works, what the output looks like, and requirements. It is complete for guiding an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it correctly focuses on the tool's functionality without redundant parameter info.

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 it retrieves a personalized market news briefing based on the user's edge library. It specifies the verb 'Get' and the resource 'personalized market news briefing', and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'search' and 'get_hypothesis' by its personalized nature and reliance on the edge library.

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 provides prerequisites (at least 5 strong edges) and a cost (credit), giving clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or mention when not to use it, missing some guidance compared to a fully explicit usage guideline.

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