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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the basic action without disclosing output format, data source, latency, or any limitations. It does not explicitly confirm side-effect-free behavior or explain what constitutes 'recent' or 'news'.

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, clear sentence with no redundant wording. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool with one parameter.

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, so the description should explain what the tool returns, but it only says 'news' without structure or format. The ambiguity around the required status of 'product' (required parameters: 0) further reduces completeness. The description is too thin for an agent to fully rely on.

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 schema already provides full coverage for the 'product' parameter with an example and guidance. The description adds no additional semantic information, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate. Note that the parameter is not marked required, which is a subtle gap not addressed by the description.

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 verb 'Find' and the resource 'recent price change news' for a product. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like price_search by focusing on news about changes rather than current prices.

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 description implies usage when one needs recent price change news, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or how it compares to alternatives like price_search or competitor_prices. No exclusions or alternative tool names are provided.

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