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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds useful behavior beyond that: newest-first sorting, cursor pagination, compact brief returns, and title-only substring matching (not full-text search). This is meaningful operational context without contradicting the annotations.

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 dense sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, the filter list is compressed into a readable set, and the sibling routing to get_article is included 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?

For a read-only, filterable list tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool does, what filters are available, ordering, pagination, and return granularity. It leaves exact brief fields and cursor mechanics to schema/output behavior, but those are minor gaps 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 input schema already documents all parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining plumb as an analytical-clarity score, labeling filters as GRIN-aware, expanding editorialMode meanings, and clarifying the title search is a substring match on titles only.

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 the tool discovers/list BedrockNews stories and enumerates the filter dimensions (verdict, plumb, editorialMode, category, date, title). It also distinguishes itself from get_article by noting it returns briefs rather than full analysis.

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?

It gives a clear usage context: use this to find and filter story briefs, with an explicit pointer to get_article for full analysis. It does not explicitly state when not to use sibling tools like list_categories or get_extraction_graph, but the filter and result-type framing makes the intended use obvious.

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