news_retrieve_article

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral context: cache TTL of 24 hours and returns 'Volltext, Metadaten und Sentiment'. No contradiction with 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 extremely concise: two sentences plus a list of args. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and cache info, with no redundant or missing elements. Every sentence adds value.

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 low complexity (few parameters, output schema present), the description is complete enough. It explains purpose, caching behavior, and return content. Annotations cover safety and idempotency, leaving no critical gaps.

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 for parameters, the description must compensate. It only lists parameter names (article_id, use_cache, response_format) without explaining their meaning, purpose, or constraints. The cache TTL mention loosely relates to use_cache but does not provide sufficient semantics.

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 verb 'abrufen' (retrieve) and resource 'Artikel' (article) by ID. It distinguishes from sibling tools like news_search and news_top_headlines, indicating a specific retrieval action.

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 mentions cache TTL (24h) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives. Usage context is implied but not explicit, lacking when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions.

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