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 profile is covered. The description adds the content categories returned but does not disclose return format, pagination, authentication, or rate-limit behavior beyond what the annotations provide.

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 front-loaded sentence that states the action and content types efficiently. It is appropriately sized for a concise tool description, though the extreme brevity contributes to gaps elsewhere.

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 0% schema description coverage and no output schema, the description should clarify parameter formats and return shape. It does not, leaving the agent with unresolved questions about valid sport/league values, the role of 'limit', and the response structure.

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%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It mentions 'sport' and 'league' but gives no format, valid values, or examples, and it omits the optional 'limit' parameter entirely, adding little beyond the schema property names.

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 names a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('recent news headlines, injury updates, breaking analysis, and roster moves'), making the tool's purpose clear and distinguishing it from the games/teams data siblings. It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative, but the news content types differentiate it sufficiently.

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 phrase 'for a given sport and league' implies the context for use, but the description provides no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no comparison to alternative tools. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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