get_news_by_site

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scoping behavior: results are recent and restricted to one publisher domain. It doesn't describe output shape or performance implications, but those are less critical given the annotations and output schema.

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 short, front-loaded sentences: the first states the operation and the second gives usage routing. There is no filler, no repetition of schema details, and every sentence earns its place.

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?

With a 100%-covered input schema, an output schema present, and read-only/non-destructive annotations, the description plus structured fields gives an agent everything needed to select and call the tool correctly. The alternative-routing sentence resolves the main ambiguity among the sibling tools.

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 all five parameters are already documented. The description reinforces that `site` is a publisher domain, but it doesn't add meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 identifies a specific action ('Find'), a precise resource ('recent Google News articles from one publisher domain'), and contrasts it with get_news_by_keyword. An agent can immediately tell this is the source-scoped sibling rather than the keyword-scoped one.

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?

It states the exact trigger ('when the user wants source-specific coverage') and explicitly names get_news_by_keyword as the cross-publisher alternative. This provides clear routing among the large set of get_news_* siblings.

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