get_latest_news

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the return fields and ordering behavior, which is useful. It does not mention anything about authentication, rate limits, or potential side effects, but for a simple read-only fetch this is a reasonable level of transparency.

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 succinct and well-organized: a one-sentence purpose, a return-format summary, and a short Args section. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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?

For a single-parameter fetch with no output schema, the description provides enough context: what is returned, in what order, and how to control the result count. It could be slightly richer by describing response shape or coin formatting, but the core information an agent needs is present.

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 0%, but the description fully explains the one parameter: limit as the maximum number of articles, with default 10 and max 100. It adds the max 100 constraint not present in the input schema, successfully compensating for the schema's lack of description.

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 states a specific action ('Get') and resource ('most recent crypto news articles') plus ordering ('newest first'), which clearly conveys what the tool does. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like get_high_score_news or search_news, but the unfiltered recency framing distinguishes it implicitly.

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 when to use the tool: when you want the latest crypto news. However, it provides no explicit guidance about alternatives or exclusions, such as 'use search_news for filtering' or 'use get_high_score_news for rated content.' This leaves selection open to inference.

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