News Detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying that exactly one article is retrieved, that the lookup is by ID, and that IDs originate from `news`/`news_search`—value beyond the annotations.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. Every word contributes to identifying the action, resource, and context.

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 low complexity (one required parameter), strong annotations, full schema coverage, and presence of an output schema, the description is sufficient. It tells the agent what the tool does, where the input comes from, and how it relates to sibling tools.

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 100% and the single `id` parameter is already well documented with type, example, and source guidance ('Get IDs from news or news_search'). The description's mention of `(from news/news_search)` adds no new semantic meaning beyond the 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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('one news article's full detail') with a clear access path ('by id'). It naturally distinguishes from siblings like `news` and `news_search` by indicating this is a single-article detail lookup rather than a list/search operation.

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 clearly places this tool after `news` or `news_search`, implying it should be used when you already have an article ID and need full details. It provides clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative detail tools among the siblings.

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