get_bitcoin_news

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only lists topics and does not disclose behavioral traits such as recency, ordering, return format, pagination, or whether it is a read-only operation. For a news tool, this is a minimal disclosure.

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, clear sentence that is front-loaded with the action ('Get') and resource ('Bitcoin-specific news'). No wasted words.

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?

The tool is simple (one param, no output schema), but the description only covers purpose, not usage or behavior. It is somewhat complete for a read-only news fetch, but with many sibling news tools, it is missing guidance on when to prefer this tool.

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?

The schema covers the only parameter (limit) with a description and default. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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: 'Get Bitcoin-specific news about BTC, Lightning Network, miners, ordinals, and more.' It specifies the resource (Bitcoin news) and the scope (BTC, Lightning, miners, ordinals), distinguishing it from general news tools like get_crypto_news or get_defi_news.

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 usage for Bitcoin-related news but does not explicitly mention when to use it instead of alternatives like get_crypto_news or get_breaking_crypto_news. It provides clear context ('Bitcoin-specific') but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative guidance.

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