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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description need not restate safety. It adds useful behavioral context by describing cursor as 'opaque pagination cursor' and published_after/before as 'ISO-8601 datetime range on published_at,' which hints at filtering and pagination behavior. There is no contradiction with the annotation.

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 compact bullet list with a one-sentence purpose up front. Each parameter gets a terse, meaningful explanation, and there is no redundant or filler text.

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 eight parameters and an output schema, the description covers most inputs and notes pagination via cursor. Missing details include page_size semantics, default behavior when no filters are provided, and result ordering. These are minor gaps given the output schema and read-only annotation, but the omission of page_size is a small hole.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden. It explains seven of eight parameters: brand_slug/brand_kind, host, language, published_after/before, and cursor. However, page_size is omitted, and the description does not provide example values or constraints beyond what the property names imply.

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 opens with 'List iGaming industry news articles,' which uses a specific verb and resource that clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_jobs, list_sources, and list_regulators. The domain qualifier 'iGaming industry' adds additional specificity.

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 provides clear context that this tool is for listing news articles, and the parameter details indicate the kinds of filtering use cases. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives, but it is the only news-specific tool among the siblings, making usage implicit and clear.

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