gdelt_news_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It does disclose a useful behavioral trait ('No API key required') and states what is returned. However, it omits other traits like rate limits, pagination behavior, or whether it is read-only (implied). This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the action and resource. Every word adds value, with no redundant or superfluous information.

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 tool's moderate complexity (6 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core purpose, return values, and a key behavioral fact. It misses some context like parameter format examples, but the schema fills that gap. Overall, it is fairly complete for an agent.

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%, so the description does not need to add much. It does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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), resource (global news via GDELT Project), and returned data types (article titles, URLs, sources, etc.). It also highlights a key differentiator ('No API key required'). This purpose is distinct from sibling tools like gdelt_geo_events and gdelt_tone_analysis.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., gdelt_geo_events, gdelt_tone_analysis). It does not specify use cases, limitations, or when not to use it. This lacks contextual decision support for the agent.

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