apnews_fact_check

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses important operational behavior: use of a production browser fleet when HTTP transport faces AP's edge challenge, explicit statement that it does not bypass authentication/access controls, and billing tiers (1 vs 5 credits). This goes beyond the basic purpose and helps an agent understand costs and failure modes.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, transport/browser behavior, and billing. The most essential information is front-loaded. No fluff or 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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description effectively covers what it returns (current fact-check headlines), how it may retrieve them (browser fleet), and cost implications. It does not detail output structure, but for a simple headlines endpoint this is arguably sufficient. Minor gap: no mention of rate limits or sort order, but not critical.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so there is no parameter information to supplement. The description correctly focuses on tool behavior rather than parameter details. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for a no-parameter tool where nothing more is needed.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get AP News fact checks.' It further clarifies it returns 'current headlines from AP News' public Fact Check page,' distinguishing it from siblings like apnews_headlines or apnews_news that cover general headlines. An agent can immediately tell this tool is for fact-check content uniquely.

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 fact-check headlines, making it obvious when to select it over the generic apnews_headlines. It does not explicitly name alternatives or provide exclusion criteria, but the focused scope is enough for an agent to make the appropriate choice.

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