get_news

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

No annotations accompany this tool, so the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It only states that the tool retrieves news; it does not describe pagination, ordering, authentication requirements, or the absence of side effects for this read operation.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It is concise, though the brevity comes at the cost of important contextual details.

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?

For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too thin. An agent cannot tell what 'news' includes, how the optional subdomain parameter affects the request, or how the result relates to the sibling notification tools.

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%, and the only parameter, subdomain, is not mentioned in the description. The description does not compensate for the schema's silence, leaving an agent to guess what the parameter means and whether it is needed.

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 names a specific operation (get) and resource (school news) and locates the source in timeline notifications. It is not a tautology, but it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling get_notifications tool.

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?

No guidance is given for when to use this tool rather than get_notifications, get_notification_history, or get_upcoming_events. The phrase 'from the timeline notifications' hints at context, but no alternatives or exclusions are provided.

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