get_trending_news

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses key behaviors: 1-hour caching, reading from Supabase cache first, and falling back to a local file cache. This is valuable context beyond a basic 'get news' statement, though it does not cover rate limits, authentication, or return format.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and source list, followed by a concise caching note. No wasted words or repetition of schema details.

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 moderate complexity and lack of output schema, the description adequately explains the aggregation function, sources, and caching strategy. It does not explicitly mention the return structure, but the name implies a list of news items, so this is not a major gap.

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 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both parameters (refresh and category). The tool description adds no additional parameter context, so the schema already fulfills the semantic load. 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?

The description clearly states what the tool does: aggregates real-time AI/tech news from multiple named sources. The verb 'aggregates' and specific resource list (HackerNews, Dev.to, Reddit, etc.) make the purpose unambiguous and distinguish it from siblings like search_today or get_paper_brief.

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 the tool is for getting trending news from various sources, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions. No comparison to sibling tools is made, so guidance is only implicit.

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