getNewsList

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the read-only nature, so the description need not repeat that. However, it adds no behavioral context such as pagination, default limits, or response structure. Since annotations carry the safety profile, the description provides minimal extra value.

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 appropriate conciseness. It consists of two words and conveys almost no information. It is not well-structured for an agent to extract actionable 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 nested objects, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and related siblings, this description is wholly inadequate. It does not explain what a 'news list' contains, how parameters work, or how it differs from similar tools. An agent cannot reliably select or call this tool based on the description.

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 by explaining parameters. It does not. The schema itself lists properties (format, limit, nometa, offset) but without descriptions, their semantics remain unclear. The description offers zero parameter guidance.

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 'List news' states a verb and resource but is extremely vague. It does not specify scope (all news, per project, etc.) or differentiate from siblings like getNewsListByProject or getNews. It is barely more specific than a tautology.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as getNewsListByProject or getNews. The description fails to mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess which listing operation to invoke.

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