get_news

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint are all safety-positive. Description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: refresh rate of 30 minutes, sources list, return fields (title, summary, source, published_at, entities), and filter options. This enriches the agent's understanding of the tool's behavior without contradicting 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 a single paragraph but efficiently packs multiple pieces of information: source scope, refresh rate, return fields, filter options, example, and disambiguation from sibling tools. It could benefit from bullet points for readability, but it remains concise without unnecessary words.

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 7 parameters and no output schema, the description covers source count and frequency, return fields, and actionable guidance on when to use alternatives. It does not detail response format or error cases, but for a news retrieval tool with read-only and idempotent hints, this level of context is sufficient.

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 description coverage is 100%, so schema already defines each parameter. Description adds semantic value by giving a concrete example ('get_news topic=AI limit=10') and clarifying the filter options (category parameter described as 'topic filter' with listed values). This exceeds baseline 3 by providing practical usage context.

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?

Explicitly states it retrieves curated data center industry news from 40+ trade sources, distinguishing itself from siblings by specifying not to use for structured M&A deals (list_transactions) or construction pipeline (get_pipeline). The verb 'get' and resource 'news' are clear and unique among sibling 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?

Provides explicit when-to-use: for industry news filtered by topic such as deals, permits, outages, policy, AI. Also clearly states when not to use: for structured M&A deal data (use list_transactions) or construction pipeline (use get_pipeline). Includes a try query example to guide usage.

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