scrape_news

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that content is fetched live over the network, results are not cached, and an empty list is returned on no results or feed parse failure. This covers key behavioral traits, though it does not mention potential timeouts, rate limits, or detailed error handling.

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 concise, with no redundant information. It front-loads the core function in the first sentence, then adds critical usage constraints and behavioral notes in a compact second paragraph. Every sentence earns its place.

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 moderate complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers return shape, parameter relationships, and edge cases like empty results and feed discovery failure. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool, though it omits minor aspects like network error handling or auth requirements.

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?

Although the schema already describes each parameter with examples, the description adds crucial semantics: the mutual exclusivity of feed_url, site_url, and article_url, and the differing return counts (one vs. up to max_articles). This goes beyond the schema and significantly aids correct invocation.

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's function: fetching news articles from RSS/Atom feeds, news sites with auto-discovery, or single articles, and returning article dicts. It uses specific verbs and resources, and the mention of news articles distinguishes it from generic scrapers like scrape_url.

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 clear usage context: 'Provide exactly one of feed_url, site_url, or article_url' and explains that article_url returns one article while feed_url/site_url return up to max_articles. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over sibling tools or any exclusions, so it stops short of full alternative guidance.

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