get_news

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context by specifying the return content (headline, publication date, summary, link to ESPN story) and the 'recent' temporal scope, which are not evident from annotations alone.

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 concise and front-loaded: one sentence states purpose, one sentence lists return fields, and one line documents the arg. There is no fluff or redundancy.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with a single optional parameter, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description fully covers purpose, return value shape, and parameter semantics. No critical information is missing.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the single parameter: 'Maximum number of articles to return (default 10).' It adds semantic meaning beyond the schema's type/default by clarifying that limit controls the maximum article count.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Get recent Women's Super League news articles.' It clearly identifies the tool's scope (WSL news) and differentiates it from sibling tools like get_standings and get_teams by focusing on news articles.

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 implies usage (call this when you need recent WSL news) but does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives or when not to use it. There is no exclusionary guidance, but the purpose is clear enough to infer the primary use case.

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