search_news

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses defaults (date_range=today, limit=50, threshold=0.6), mode-specific behavior (threshold only for fuzzy), return format (JSON with hotlist and optional RSS), and platform handling (default all platforms). It does not mention rate limits or side effects, but such are not critical for a search tool.

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 well-structured: a one-line summary, a usage tip, a comprehensive Args list, Returns, and Examples. It is detailed due to 10 parameters but every sentence adds value; no fluff or redundancy.

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 complexity (10 params, no annotations), the description covers all parameters, return structure, and usage examples. The presence of an output schema also means return values need not be over-explained, and the description is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 has no parameter descriptions (0% coverage), so the description fully compensates by detailing every parameter: valid search_mode values, date_range format, platforms as list, sort_by options, threshold semantics, and boolean flags. Examples further clarify usage.

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 opens with '统一搜索接口，支持多种搜索模式，可同时搜索热榜和RSS', which clearly states a specific verb (search), resource (unified interface for hotlists and RSS), and differentiates from siblings like search_rss by emphasizing both sources and multiple modes.

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?

It provides explicit guidance to call resolve_date_range for natural language dates, addressing a common prerequisite. It also implies usage for combined hotlist/RSS searches, though it does not explicitly exclude alternatives like search_rss for RSS-only queries.

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