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

Annotations already declare read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context beyond that by disclosing that full_text triggers one extra API call per article read, which is important cost/rate information, though it does not discuss pagination or result freshness.

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 compact, front-loaded, and organized by parameter. Every sentence adds information, with no redundant or filler phrasing.

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 four parameters, an output schema, and annotations covering safety traits, the description supplies the key missing semantics and cost warning. It is complete enough to call correctly, with only minor gaps around defaults and return-value expectations already covered by the output schema.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it largely does: it explains the country code format with examples, lists valid category values, states the limit range, and clarifies the full_text behavior and cost. It omits default values such as limit=10 and category=all, but those remain visible in the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Latest local news from one country.' It explicitly distinguishes the tool from 'news_search' for subject-based searches, so an agent can tell which tool to pick without opening the schema.

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 clear routing guidance: use this tool for news from a country, and use 'news_search with country' when looking for news about a subject. It does not explicitly state exclusions or cover alternatives like the sibling 'news' tool, but the main alternative is named with its selecting condition.

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