search_news

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It states the tool searches 'all feeds' but does not elaborate on scope (e.g., number of feeds, update frequency), result ordering, or whether it supports fuzzy matching or case sensitivity. The output schema exists but is not referenced in the description.

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 a single sentence, achieving conciseness, but it may be too brief given the lack of behavioral context. It front-loads the core purpose but omits details that could aid comprehension. It is not wasteful, but feels under-specified.

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?

Despite the presence of an output schema and a simple parameter set, the description does not provide enough context for an agent to fully understand its usage. It fails to mention result format, pagination, or any constraints like language or date range, which are typical for a search tool.

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 single parameter 'keyword' is fully described in the input schema (100% schema description coverage), and the description adds no additional nuance beyond that. A score of 3 is appropriate as the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Search'), the resource ('all feeds'), and the target ('articles matching a keyword'), making it easy to understand the tool's purpose. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'latest_news' and 'trending_topics' by focusing on keyword-based search across all feeds.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'latest_news' (for recent articles) or 'trending_topics' (for popular subjects). The description lacks any when-to-use or when-not-to-use context, leaving the agent to infer based solely on tool names.

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