search_news

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the searched fields (titles and summaries) and the 7-day default window, but duplicates the schema default (hours=168) and says nothing about pagination or result caps.

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?

One compact sentence with the primary action front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though the terseness leaves room for useful detail that was omitted rather than a structural flaw.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. Still, for a 4-parameter search tool with 0% schema coverage, the missing semantics of category (what values are valid?) and limit leave the definition only minimally adequate.

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 must compensate; it clarifies what "query" matches against and restates the default window that the schema already encodes as hours=168. The limit and category parameters remain completely unexplained in both places.

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 states a specific verb ("Recherche") and resource (news titles and summaries), plus the searched fields, so the agent knows exactly what it does. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling latest_news, which likely performs a similar retrieval.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no reference to the alternatives (latest_news, digest, list_sources). The keyword-search framing implies usage but leaves the agent to infer when this tool beats its siblings.

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