getNewsListByProject

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only implies a read operation via 'List' but does not disclose response format, pagination behavior, or any potential side effects. The query params like limit, offset, and nometa remain unexplained.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise and respects the reader's attention, though it sacrifices detail for brevity.

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 5 parameters across two nested objects, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is woefully incomplete. It fails to explain any parameter semantics, expected return structure, or behavioral nuances, making it inadequate for an agent to invoke correctly.

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%, yet the description provides zero information about parameters. The schema itself has no descriptions for format, projectId, limit, offset, or nometa, and the description does not compensate. The agent cannot understand what values to provide or their meaning.

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 'List news by project' clearly states the verb (List), resource (news), and scope (by project), which distinguishes it from the sibling getNewsList that likely lists all news. However, it is overly terse and could be more explicit about filtering by projectId.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling getNewsList exists for a broader scope, but the description does not mention it or any exclusion criteria. Users are left to infer usage.

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