trending_feed

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: expected volume (~10-20 trends), single-request cost, and that results include headlines and links. Only a note on pagination/rate behavior is missing.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the resource definition and followed by the sibling comparison and the geo semantics. Efficient, with only mild informality ('the news stories behind each').

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers volume, content, locale semantics, and sibling routing. The only gap is the undocumented limit parameter.

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 must carry parameter meaning. It does well for geo (country code, blank = default location, else US) but says nothing about the limit parameter, leaving one of two params entirely undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('top daily search trends with the news stories behind each') and explicitly frames it as Google's public trending feed. It is immediately distinguishable from trending_now in both what it returns and its weight.

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?

Names the sibling alternative (trending_now) and gives the condition that selects this tool: lighter, one request, carries headlines and links, best for 'what is in the news in <country> today'. Usage is explicit rather than implied.

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