Find Apple updates and release notes

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds a useful caveat that results are not claimed to be live, and it indicates that pages will be dated with version-specific source links, giving extra behavioral context beyond the structured annotations.

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 with no filler. The core operation is stated first, and the 'Does not claim live results' caveat earns its place as an important behavioral note.

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?

The description conveys what the tool searches and partially describes the result type, but with no output schema it leaves the output format and query semantics unexplained. It is adequate for a simple search tool but has clear gaps an agent would need to infer.

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%, and the description does not explain what the 'query' parameter should contain or how the 'limit' parameter behaves. While 'limit' has useful bounds in the schema, the meaning of 'query' and its relationship to results are left entirely to inference.

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 ('Search') and a specific resource ('dated Apple update and release-note landing pages with version-specific source links'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It also distinguishes this tool from sibling search tools like search_apple_technologies by focusing on updates and release notes.

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 for when to use the tool: when looking for Apple update and release-note landing pages. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the resource is specific enough that an agent can select this tool appropriately.

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