guardian_search_articles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose that this is a read-only operation, nor does it mention rate limits, API key requirements (though api_key is in schema), or pagination behavior. Only the basic functionality is 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?

The description is very concise (one sentence) but lacks structure. While it earns its place by stating the core purpose, it could be expanded with parameter hints or behavioral notes without becoming verbose.

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 complexity (6 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It does not cover required/optional fields, expected output, or any usage context beyond the basic search intent.

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%, and the description provides no information about any of the 6 parameters (q, section, from_date, to_date, page_size, api_key). The agent has no guidance on how to use optional filters or the required 'q' field.

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 states 'Search for articles on The Guardian,' which is a clear verb-resource pair. It distinguishes from siblings like guardian_get_article (single article retrieval) and guardian_get_sections (section listing). However, it could be more precise about the filtering capabilities implied by the schema parameters.

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 on when to use this vs. other Guardian tools (e.g., guardian_get_article for specific articles, guardian_get_sections for section metadata). No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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