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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: the 72-hour recency scope, sentence-level co-occurrence semantics, and that results include surrounding context. It does not add auth, rate-limit, or pagination details, but the output schema likely covers return shape.

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?

One tightly written sentence with zero waste. The purpose and differentiator are front-loaded, and the comparison to gdelt-search is placed at the end without redundancy.

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 nine parameters all covered by the schema, an existing output schema, and annotations covering safety, the description supplies everything else an agent needs: scope, return behavior, and sibling differentiation. Nothing material is missing for correct invocation.

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 the schema already documents all nine parameters with formats, constraints, defaults, and caps. The description adds no parameter-specific syntax or meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb (Search), resource (GDELT-monitored news), and distinguishing constraint (sentences where every query term appears together, returning sentence plus context). Explicitly names and contrasts with sibling gdelt-search, so an agent can select correctly without opening schemas.

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 clear when-to-use guidance by contrasting with gdelt-search: use this when you need sentence-level co-occurrence and a snippet, not article-level matching with no snippet. The alternative and the condition that selects it are both named.

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