agentscoin_news

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is partly covered; the description usefully adds that the call costs 0.1 AGENT, which explains the destructive/spend nature. However, it does not explain how payment is executed, whether the charge is incurred on failure, or how privateKey relates to the charge.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; name, purpose, source and cost are all delivered without waste.

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 no output schema and 0% parameter coverage, the description should say more about the query parameter and the payment mechanism. It adequately covers what the tool returns conceptually (news headlines) and its cost, but leaves key operational details to inference.

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. It implies a payment flow (hence privateKey) via the 'Costs 0.1 AGENT' line, but the query parameter is never described, and neither parameter's required/optional status or format is clarified.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get top tech/startup news'), and names the data source and quality tier, which lets an agent distinguish it from siblings like agentscoin_weather or agentscoin_price. No explicit sibling comparison is made, but the resource is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus other data tools, when not to use it, or prerequisites such as needing a funded wallet. The cost note implies a precondition but does not state it as guidance.

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