createNews

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

The description discloses no behavioral traits. Annotations only include readOnlyHint: false, which already indicates a write operation, but the description adds nothing about side effects, required permissions, validation rules, or response behavior. For a mutation tool with minimal annotations, this is a significant gap.

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 short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It does not earn its place by conveying any meaningful information beyond the tool name. A single vague phrase without substance is not appropriately sized for a tool with this complexity.

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 nested object structure, required parameters, and absence of an output schema, the description is wholly inadequate. It provides no context about what the news object requires, what format means, or how the tool behaves. An agent cannot reliably call this tool correctly with the given information.

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 description does not mention any parameters. It fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation. The agent must infer the meaning of pathParams, bodyParams, and the nested news object structure entirely from the schema, which provides field names but no 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 'Create news' is essentially a tautology that restates the tool name. It identifies a verb and resource but provides no details about what 'news' means or how this differs from sibling operations like updateNews or deleteNews. It fails to differentiate from other news-related tools.

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?

There is zero guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, conditions for choosing createNews over updateNews or deleteNews, or any context for when creation is appropriate. The description gives no usage context whatsoever.

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