finance_news

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it mentions '通过真正的搜索API' (through a real search API) and '智能搜索' (intelligent search), it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, authentication requirements, what '主流财经媒体' (mainstream financial media) specifically includes, or how results are returned. The description is insufficient for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 appropriately concise with a single sentence that efficiently communicates the core functionality. It's front-loaded with the main purpose and doesn't contain unnecessary information, though it could be slightly more structured by separating the purpose from the parameter guidance.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (news articles, headlines, summaries?), the format of results, potential limitations, or error conditions. For a search tool that presumably returns complex news data, this level of description is inadequate.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the query parameter fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only repeating that it supports '单个或多个关键词智能搜索' (single or multiple keyword intelligent search) without providing additional semantic context about how the search works or what '智能' (intelligent) specifically means.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: '获取主流财经媒体的新闻内容' (get financial news content from mainstream media) and '支持单个或多个关键词智能搜索' (supports single or multiple keyword intelligent search). It specifies the verb (获取/get) and resource (新闻内容/news content), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'macro_econ' or 'stock_data' which might also provide financial information.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when this tool is appropriate compared to sibling tools like 'company_performance', 'macro_econ', or 'stock_data', nor does it provide any context about when not to use it or what prerequisites might be needed.

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