Ticker news feed

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description goes beyond these by detailing pagination (cursor-based), the inclusion of insider news by default with an option to exclude, the collapse_stories feature, and the setting of unknown_ticker for unrecognized symbols. This adds significant value for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 concise three-sentence paragraph. The first sentence states the core purpose. The second explains key options (include_insider, collapse_stories). The third mentions an important behavior (unknown_ticker). Every sentence is necessary and adds value, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 (5 params, 1 required) and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers all important behaviors: pagination, insider inclusion, story collapsing, and error flag for unknown tickers. It even references alphai_news_search for output shape, providing a complete picture for an agent.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra context: the ticker example, the default inclusion of insider news, the page size limits (10 basic/50 Pro), and the behavior of unknown_ticker (only mentioned in description, not in schema). This provides meaning beyond the schema alone.

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 provides 'Latest news for a single ticker', specifying the action (latest news) and resource (single ticker). It distinguishes itself from siblings like alphai_news_search (which likely covers multiple tickers or search queries) and alphai_insider_news (which is pure insider news) by highlighting the inclusion of insider news by default and the ability to get a non-insider feed.

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 when to use this tool: when you need the latest news for a specific ticker, optionally including or excluding insider news. It mentions cursor-pagination and states it returns the same shape as alphai_news_search, providing a reference for expected format. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives beyond implicit differentiation from siblings.

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