search_news

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds valuable context: the tool costs $0.003 per call, requires payment in USDC via x402, and returns both the merchant's artifact and payment receipt. This goes beyond a basic read-only impression, though it does not detail failure modes or side effects.

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 exactly two sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second covers cost, payment, and return values. Every word earns its place, and the content is front-loaded with the most important 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 there is no output schema, the description compensates by explaining the return format (merchant's artifact and payment receipt) and the payment mechanism. It covers the essential operational context, though it could elaborate on what the artifact contains or how the result is structured.

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?

The input schema already describes all parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds some relational context ('topic' maps to q, 'time window' maps to since, 'max articles' maps to limit), but it does not provide additional syntax or formatting details beyond the 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 uses a specific verb ('Query') and names the exact resource ('the global news wire') with a clear scope ('coverage of a topic in a time window'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_flights and search_hotels, which serve different domains.

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 clearly indicates when to use the tool: when you need news coverage on a topic within a time window. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficiently clear given the sibling tool names.

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