get_news_by_keyword

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context like 'recent' and the free-form vs. predefined distinction, but does not disclose behaviors such as result ordering, summarization behavior, or what happens when no results are found. This is adequate but not rich.

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 with no wasted words: the first states the primary purpose and scope, the second provides sibling routing. The key scoping phrase 'free-form keyword or phrase' is front-loaded.

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 the output schema exists, the schema fully documents parameters, and annotations cover read-only behavior, the description is sufficient for an agent to correctly invoke the tool. It adds the missing usage context (ad-hoc vs. topic vs. site) that structured fields do not provide.

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 five parameters. The description adds the concept of a 'free-form keyword or phrase' which maps to the keyword parameter, but it does not add meaning beyond the schema for period, full_data, summarize, or max_results. 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Find') with a clear resource ('recent Google News articles') and scope ('free-form keyword or phrase'). It also explicitly differentiates from siblings by naming get_news_by_topic and get_news_by_site, so an agent can immediately tell which tool to choose.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('ad-hoc subject searches') and names the alternatives with their conditions ('predefined topic category' and 'one publisher'). This gives clear routing guidance without requiring schema inspection.

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