find_similar_news

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that limit is a maximum (actual returns may be less) and that include_url defaults to false to save tokens. These traits help the agent anticipate behavior. However, it doesn't mention any side effects or authorization needs, which is acceptable for a read-like operation.

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 moderately concise but includes a data display strategy section that is somewhat extraneous for tool invocation. It front-loads the purpose and parameter explanations, but the display strategy could be moved to a separate guidance. It is not overly verbose, but every sentence is not strictly necessary.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema (not shown but signaled), the description does not need to detail return fields. It covers all input parameters, explains the output format as JSON with similarity scores, and includes a display strategy that guides the agent on how to present results. This makes the tool well-documented for its complexity.

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%, so the description compensates well. It explains the meaning of threshold (higher = stricter matches), limit (max 100, actual may be lower), and include_url (token saving). For reference_title, it only states 'full or partial', which is adequate. Overall, it adds significant value over the bare 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 finds news similar to a specified title, using a distinct approach from siblings like search_news or get_latest_news. The verb and resource are specific, and the purpose is unambiguous.

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 parameter-level guidance (e.g., threshold affects strictness, limit may return fewer results) but lacks explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives. No comparison with sibling tools like search_related_news_history is given, so usage context is implied but not fully clarified.

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