search_news

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; the description adds the useful behavioral fact that no API key is required and discloses the return fields. It does not discuss rate limits or result ordering, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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 tight sentences with no filler; the core action and resource are front-loaded, and the return fields and auth note each add 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?

With an output schema present, return value details are already structured. The description covers the key selection signal (Hacker News source), simplicity, and auth. It could mention that it only searches Hacker News rather than the general web, but the tool name already conveys that.

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 50%: 'query' is minimally described and 'max_results' lacks a description. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, and does not compensate for the undocumented max_results parameter.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('Hacker News') with a scope ('tech news, discussions, and trending links'), and lists the returned fields. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling search tools like search_web or search_wikipedia.

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?

Usage context is implied by the Hacker News resource and the 'No API key required' note, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over search_web or other search siblings, nor any when-not-to-use conditions.

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