News Get News

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety and idempotency profile is fully covered. The description adds that results are 'recent', implying freshness, but says nothing about result volume, ordering, pagination, or what the 'limit' cap does. With annotations carrying the safety burden, this is adequate but thin.

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 sentence with the verb front-loaded and no filler. The enumerated content types (headlines, injury updates, analysis, roster moves) each convey distinct value, though the list is slightly long for what could be summarized as 'news'.

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 three-parameter, no-output-schema, read-only tool whose annotations cover the safety profile, the description is functionally complete enough to invoke. It leaves gaps on limit semantics and whether results are paginated or time-bounded, which an agent would need to call it well.

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 67%: 'sport' and 'league' carry example values ('basketball', 'nba, eng.1'), while 'limit' is undocumented in both schema and description. The description only restates that sport and league are inputs, adding no format, casing, or accepted-values guidance (e.g. that 'eng.1' implies soccer league slugs) beyond the schema examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Fetch') and resource ('news headlines, injury updates, breaking analysis, and roster moves'), scoped to sport and league. It is clearly distinguishable from the games_* and teams_* siblings, which return scores, rosters, and stats rather than editorial content. It stops short of naming a sibling, but the domain separation 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?

The 'recent news' framing implies usage (when you need current headlines or injury/roster updates), and it is the only news tool among the siblings, so the choice is implied. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no guidance on how this differs from, say, games_get_transactions for roster moves, and no stated prerequisites.

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