get_geo_feed

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the tool 'gets news' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication requirements, pagination behavior, error conditions, or whether this is a read-only operation. The description is minimal beyond the basic function.

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 appropriately sized with clear sections (purpose, args, returns). The first sentence states the core purpose, followed by parameter documentation and return format. No wasted sentences, though the structure could be more front-loaded with usage 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 3 parameters with 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the description provides basic parameter semantics and return format. However, with an output schema available, the return value documentation is redundant. For a news retrieval tool with geographic filtering, more context about data freshness, source limitations, or result formatting would be helpful.

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 compensate. It provides basic semantics for all 3 parameters (location, language, country) with examples for location and default values for language/country. However, it doesn't specify format requirements, valid country/language codes, or constraints beyond the basic definitions.

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 'Get news specific to a geographic location' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from siblings like get_category_feed, get_search_feed, and get_topic_feed by specifying geographic focus. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with get_top_headlines which might also have geographic filtering.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like get_category_feed, get_search_feed, and get_top_headlines available, there's no indication of when geographic filtering is preferred over category-based, search-based, or top headlines approaches.

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