get_stock_news

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds little beyond that: it says 'recent' without defining a recency window and does not mention rate limits, source constraints, or auth needs.

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 compact and front-loaded, using a clear Args/Returns structure. Each sentence and field adds useful information without repetition.

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 retrieval tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return contents adequately. It could be more complete by defining what 'recent' means, but no critical invocation detail 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It documents both parameters, explaining that ticker is a stock ticker symbol and limit is the maximum number of articles with a default of 10, though it does not specify ticker format or limit bounds.

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 states a specific verb and resource: get recent news articles about a stock. It is clear what the tool retrieves, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from adjacent research tools such as SEC filings, analyst estimates, or company info.

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?

Usage is implied by the purpose: use this when recent stock news is needed. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus related tools, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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