get_market_news

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden, and it discloses essentially nothing: whether the call is read-only, whether it hits a live network source, what "freshness" means, or how retries/require_fresh affect behavior. The only behavioral hint is the untranslated reference to another tool's semantics, which the agent cannot resolve.

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?

It is short, which is good, but the single sentence is a cross-reference fragment rather than a front-loaded statement of purpose. Brevity here reflects under-specification, not efficiency.

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?

A 5-parameter, zero-coverage tool with no annotations and no output schema needs a substantial description, and this one provides almost nothing. The agent cannot determine input formats, freshness semantics, return shape, or relationship to sibling news tools from this definition.

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?

Five parameters with 0% schema description coverage, and the description explains none of them. Critical semantics are missing: what limit/offset page over, what values 'format' accepts, whether retries triggers re-fetching on failure, and what require_fresh=true actually enforces (error vs. stale data).

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 names the resource ("market-news") and hints at a JSON output and a freshness notion, but it does so entirely by reference to an external CLI invocation ("Same DangInvest ... as a-share-data fetch_danginvest --news"). It never states in its own terms what the tool returns or how it differs from nearby news tools such as get_company_news, so it largely restates the name plus an opaque pointer.

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 when-to-use guidance, no distinction between market-wide news and the sibling get_company_news, and no mention of prerequisites, freshness expectations, or rate limits. An agent has no basis for choosing this tool over alternatives or knowing when not to call it.

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