全球财经快讯

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral traits. It only states it 'gets' news, offering no details about data source, update frequency, return format, or potential limitations (e.g., pagination, latency). This is insufficient for an agent to anticipate tool behavior.

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 a single, short sentence that conveys the core purpose. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every word earns its place. There is no redundancy or unnecessary content.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally complete. However, it does not specify what information the news contains (e.g., titles, summaries, sources). For a news tool, additional context about the return structure would be helpful, but the description meets a basic threshold.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details, and the baseline is 4. The description correctly omits any parameter-related information since none exist.

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 '获取最新的全球财经快讯' clearly states the verb ('获取' - get) and the specific resource ('全球财经快讯' - global financial news). The term 'global' distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'stock_news' (likely domestic Chinese) and 'stock_news_us' (US), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 implies use for global financial news but does not explicitly state when to avoid using it or mention alternatives such as 'stock_news' or 'stock_news_us'. While sibling names provide context, the description itself lacks direct usage guidance.

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