company_news

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions date ranges and output formats but does not cover rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens if the company is not found. The behavioral aspects are minimally addressed.

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 concise, front-loaded with a clear summary, and uses a structured list for parameters. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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 8 parameters and no annotations, the description covers parameter meanings, source types, and output format options. It does not detail the output structure, but an output schema exists to fill that gap. Overall, it provides sufficient context for basic usage.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description includes a docstring explaining each parameter with examples (e.g., topic filter with example values, date format). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 it gets 'the latest news and developments about a company' and lists specific types of coverage (product launches, funding, partnerships). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on other aspects like financials or culture.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools, the description should indicate when company_news is the right choice, but it only describes what it does without context.

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