Get News Briefing

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns by using 'Get' and 'Returns.' It adds useful context about the source (Briefing.com) and the response nature (full commentary/analysis article), going beyond the annotation. However, it does not disclose potential rate limits or behavior when no briefing is available.

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, front-loaded with the key action and resource, and no wasted words. Every part of the description contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and output.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool, the description covers the essentials: what it gets, from where, and what it returns. Minor gaps include no mention of authentication requirements or handling of empty/missing briefings, but these are not critical given the tool's simplicity.

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 tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100% and there is nothing for the description to explain. Per the baseline for zero-parameter tools, a score of 4 is appropriate; the description does not need to add parameter details.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and names the exact resource ('market news briefing from Briefing.com') while also clarifying the return type ('full market commentary/analysis article'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_news_sources, which likely returns a list of sources rather than a briefing article.

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 usage context is implied: use this when you want the latest market news briefing. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs. alternate guidance, and no mention of alternative tools (e.g., get_news_sources) or exclusions, relying solely on the description's implied purpose.

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