loc_newspaper_titles

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

The annotations include readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is already disclosed. The description adds context that this is a search over Chronicling America, but does not mention behavior like pagination, result formats, or limitations. With annotations covering safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description is two concise sentences with no wasted words. It fronts the main purpose and immediately elaborates with the search dimensions. Extremely efficient.

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 read-only search tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately conveys the core function. However, it does not mention what types of results are returned (e.g., full title records, publication details), nor does it clarify interaction with sibling loc tools, leaving a small completeness gap.

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 already covers 100% of parameters with descriptions ('City name', 'U.S. state name', 'Search terms for newspaper name'). The description restates these via 'by name, state, or city' but adds no extra semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool searches newspaper titles in Chronicling America, and clarifies it finds newspapers by name, state, or city. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like loc_newspaper_search, which likely searches newspaper content, though the differentiation is subtle and not explicitly stated.

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 implies the tool is used when looking up newspapers by name, state, or city. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as loc_newspaper_search or loc_search, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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