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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses that only metadata is returned (id, title, kind, author, date), that full content requires a second call, and that release notes live elsewhere. It does not mention ordering, permissions, or rate limits, though the query parameter's schema note covers best-match ordering.

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?

Five short sentences, each carrying a distinct fact (scope, default filter, search, return shape, exclusion), with the return-shape caveat front-loaded before the sibling call. The phrase "in tabs of their own partner press and third-party reprints" is slightly convoluted but still parseable.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by naming the returned fields and pointing to get_blog_post for the full record. Combined with the schema's paging and enum documentation, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly on the first try.

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 limit, offset, query, and source are already fully documented in the input schema. The description restates the source-omission behavior and query semantics but adds no syntax, defaults, or edge-case detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ("List the blog posts nearpedia holds") and immediately enumerates the content kinds it covers (articles, news, press releases, partner press, third-party reprints). It is clearly distinguished from get_blog_post, which it names as the single-post reader.

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?

Gives explicit routing rules: omit source for the All view, pass query to search titles and text, call get_blog_post with an id to read one, and look under /releases for release notes instead. Both the when-to-use alternative and a hard exclusion are stated.

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