search_topicsSearch Geotone's tracked geopolitical topics by keyword (matches name, slug, and description). Returns slugs usable with get_topic, plus each topic's current coverage stats.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Keyword, e.g. 'nuclear' or 'china' |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| meta | No | ||
| query | Yes | ||
| results | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "properties": {
+ "meta": {
+ "properties": {
+ "attribution": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "license": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "source": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "query": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "results": {
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "properties": {
+ "latestToneAvg": {
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "latestVolIntensity": {
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "meta": {
+ "properties": {
+ "attribution": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "license": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "source": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "page": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "slug": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "zScore": {
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "query",
+ "results"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already show readOnlyHint=true; description adds that it returns slugs and coverage stats, enhancing transparency. No contradictions. Could mention result limits or ordering, but sufficient for a search tool.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with action and resource. Every word adds value, no 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 single parameter, clear annotations, and existence of output schema, description fully covers tool behavior and output. References sibling tool for workflow completeness.
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 covers 100% with description and example. Description adds meaning: query matches name, slug, and description. Provides additional context beyond 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?
Clearly states verb 'Search', resource 'geopolitical topics', and matching criteria (keyword on name, slug, description). Distinguishes from sibling 'get_topic' by noting returned slugs can be used with that tool.
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?
Describes when to use: to find topics by keyword. Mentions returned slugs are input to get_topic, providing guidance. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools, but context from siblings is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.