Search VR / AR / XR news

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, destructiveHint. Description adds that data is from a 'live aggregated feed' with specific sources (8 VR-native + filtered tech), giving freshness context. No contradictions or hidden behaviors stated.

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 sentences, front-loaded with primary action and source. No filler words. Each clause adds value.

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?

No output schema, but description sufficiently covers what the tool returns (headlines, filtered). Context from many optional params and sibling tools suggests search is the entry point. Could mention pagination or date range, 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters. Description's addition ('Optionally filter by category and match a keyword') summarizes but adds no new information beyond schema. Baseline 3 for high coverage.

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?

Clearly states verb 'returns', resource 'headlines', source 'live aggregated feed from VR.org', and optional filters. Distinguishes from siblings which are specific VR entity tools (e.g., compare_vr_headsets, get_top_vr_apps).

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?

Description mentions optional filters but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_vr_tools? Sibling names suggest distinct functions, but no when-not-to-use statements. Adequate but not explicit.

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