news_feed

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

No annotations, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses the default date range (last 30 days) and date format (YYYY-MM-DD), which is useful. It does not state whether this is read-only, permissions needed, pagination, or anything about the feed contents.

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?

Extremely concise, front-loads the resource, then the date semantics. Nothing is wasted, though the brevity leaves 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?

Output schema exists, so return values needn't be described. However, with no annotations and 0% schema coverage, the description should say more about what the feed contains and how child_id scopes results. It covers defaults but not enough for a complete picture.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for from_date/to_date (date format and default) but says nothing about the required child_id. Partial compensation for a 3-parameter schema.

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 resource ('Oppslag/«Siste nytt» for et barn' – a news feed for a child) with a clear read scope. It doesn't differentiate from siblings like list_message_threads or get_message_thread, but the resource is distinct enough.

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 when-to-use guidance and no reference to alternatives. The only contextual hint is the default 30-day window, which is usage context but not selection guidance.

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