createNews

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it fails to do so. 'Create news' only repeats the tool name and implies creation, without mentioning side effects, required permissions, return values, or potential errors. This is nearly as opaque as the 'Process' placeholder, providing zero behavioral insight.

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 extremely terse—only two words—which is under-specification rather than conciseness. Every sentence should earn its place, but here there is no substance. The lack of detail makes it nearly useless, similar to a placeholder.

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 a nested schema with required parameters (format, projectId, news) and no output schema, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain the meaning of the format parameter, the role of projectId, or the required structure of the news object. An agent cannot reliably invoke this tool with such insufficient context.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, and the description mentions no parameters. It does not explain pathParams (format, projectId) or bodyParams (the news object structure). While the schema itself is detailed, the description adds no semantic meaning, leaving the agent to infer parameter purpose from names alone.

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 'Create news' is a direct restatement of the tool name 'createNews', providing only a verb and resource noun. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like createProject or createUser, nor does it elaborate on what 'news' specifically entails. This is a tautology rather than a clarifying statement.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions. There is no context to help an agent decide between this and other create operations, such as createIssue or createProject.

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