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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds beyond annotations by disclosing the output as 'structured rows' with specific fields, and mentions the $0.03/call cost and x402 payment mechanism—useful behavioral context. No contradictions with 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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys purpose and output, followed by pricing. No filler words, clearly front-loaded, and every phrase earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by listing the output fields and indicating structured rows. It also includes pricing, which is relevant for agent decision-making. Minor gaps include no mention of result ordering or handling of empty results, but the description is complete enough for a straightforward search scraper with well-annotated safe behavior.

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 100%, so each parameter (query, max_items, max_pages) already has a meaningful description. The tool description does not add extra parameter semantics, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('Detik news'), and enumerates the exact fields returned (headlines, excerpts, timestamps, sections, images, canonical article URLs). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling scrapers targeting other sites or data types.

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 use case is implied by 'Search Detik news' and the listed output fields, but the description does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. No comparison to sibling tools is offered, leaving the agent to infer fit from the name and purpose.

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