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

Annotations confirm it is read-only and safe (no destructive hint). The description adds the constraint that the results are matching pages with a one-line description, setting the expectation for the return structure beyond 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 definition is concise and front-loads the core directive about the return value (link to page) before specifying the scope and exclusions. It is efficient.

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 it returns a list of matching pages with one-line descriptions, it is reasonably complete for an agent. It directs the agent on the distinction between this tool and other information retrieval tools, which adds significant value.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the description primarily confirms the purpose of 'query' (the topic) and introduces the 'limit' parameter, although it doesn't add unique semantic meaning not covered by the schema's 'maximum/minimum' constraints.

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?

Clearly states the function: to find a link to the GTA6 Times page covering a topic. While specific, it is not as robust as a sibling tool that might have a more precise verb for its specific scope (e.g., 'list_page_links').

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?

Provides explicit usage instructions, specifically telling the user to use this tool for getting a *link* to a page, and to use sibling tools like 'search' or 'fetch' when the *sourced text itself* is required.

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