Read a news article

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by disclosing the return shape ('headline, publication time and body text') — the only place this is stated, since there is no output schema. It does not mention rate limits, auth, or whether body text is truncated for long articles.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler: what it reads, what it returns, and how to get the id. The essential use-after guidance is placed last and correctly follows the purpose statement.

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 single-parameter read tool with strong annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return contents, and prerequisite routing. Nothing an agent needs in order to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and the id parameter already documents its origin and an example value (20152), so the schema carries the full burden. The description only says 'one article' and adds no format, range, or error-handling guidance beyond the schema — the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read the text of one Fara Bourse news article') and enumerates the content classes it covers (weekly trading statistics, listings, rule changes). The singular 'one article' plus the stated return fields immediately distinguishes it from list-style siblings like ifb_announcements.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent it must first obtain the id via ifb_announcements(source="news"), which is a concrete prerequisite and effectively names the companion tool. It does not state any when-not condition or contrast with other content-fetching siblings, but the sequencing guidance is unambiguous.

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