add_news_source

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It states the core action but omits important details such as URL validation, duplicate handling, whether the addition is immediate or persistent, any required permissions, and what the return value or error behavior is. This is insufficient for a mutation 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 two concise sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action and then adds a brief purpose statement. Every word earns its place.

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 simple add operation with two parameters, the description covers the basic function and purpose. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not mention return values, success/failure indicators, or side effects. It is minimally viable but could do more to explain the full lifecycle of adding a news source.

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 100% with both parameters clearly described in the schema. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema: it mentions RSS URL and personalization of media, but does not elaborate on parameter formats, constraints, or examples beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Añade un diario o fuente de noticias usando su URL de RSS' (Adds a newspaper or news source using its RSS URL). It uses a specific verb ('Añade') and resource ('fuente de noticias') and distinguishes from siblings like remove_news_source, list_news_sources, and get_daily_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 gives clear context for use: adding a news source to customize which media appear in news consumption ('Permite personalizar de qué medios se quieren obtener noticias'). It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternative tool names, but the purpose and context are clear enough for an add operation among sibling list/remove/get tools.

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