Latest News

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral details: rate limits (10 free vs 50 paid), pagination via token, and lookback timeframe constraints. These go beyond the structured annotations and help set correct expectations.

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 well-structured with a concise summary, a bulleted parameter list, and concrete examples. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the format is easy to scan. The length is appropriate for a feature-rich news API.

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's complexity (19 parameters, no output schema) and the rich sibling toolset, the description covers purpose, key parameters, rate limits, and usage examples. It doesn't fully describe the response structure, but this is partially mitigated by the clear scope and familiar news-article concept. The description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool 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?

The input schema covers all 19 parameters at 100% coverage, giving the baseline of 3. The description adds value by providing usage examples and clarifying semantic relationships (e.g., timeframe hours/minutes, sentiment values, country codes). This pushes it above the baseline but not to 5 since the schema already documents each parameter thoroughly.

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 opens with 'Fetch the latest news articles from the past 48 hours worldwide,' which combines a specific verb, resource, and temporal scope. The scope distinguishes it from siblings like newsdata_archive and newsdata_crypto, making the tool's role clear.

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 a clear context of use: fetching recent, worldwide news with various filters. It includes examples of valid queries and parameter combinations. However, it does not explicitly name sibling tools or state when to prefer this over alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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