get_news

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return type (headlines, summaries, URLs, ticker symbols) but does not mention pagination behavior, result limits, or content inclusion flags—these are left to the schema. The behavior is not misleading, but the description adds only modest transparency beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 two sentences with no filler. The first sentence immediately states the core function, and the second covers filtering and output. Every word adds value, making it highly efficient and front-loaded.

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 the tool has 8 optional parameters and an output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It covers the main use case (filtering and retrieving news) without explaining return values in detail, which is appropriate since the output schema exists. It could mention pagination or limits, but those are well-defined in the schema, so the description suffices for initial selection and invocation.

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 each parameter already has a description. The tool description summarizes key filtering dimensions (symbols, date range, sort order) but does not add detail beyond the schema. This aligns with the baseline of 3 when schema covers parameter semantics.

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 explicitly states 'Retrieves news articles for stocks and crypto,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like quotes, bars, and trades, which retrieve market data rather than news. The mention of 'headlines, summaries, URLs, and associated ticker symbols' further clarifies the tool's purpose.

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 says 'Filter by symbols, date range, and sort order,' which establishes the tool's typical usage context. While it doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives or name when-not-to-use, the sibling list shows no other news retrieval tool, so the usage context is clear without needing exclusions.

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