Google News search

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false), and the description adds valuable operational context beyond them: return fields, the Google redirect being resolved, latency ("typically a few seconds"), the 100-article cap, and pricing ($1 per 1,000 articles). It does not address auth/credential needs or rate limits, keeping it below a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with what the tool does, then return shape, filtering options, use cases, and finally limits/cost. Every sentence adds an actionable fact and none is redundant.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating return fields; with annotations present, it still contributes latency, cost, and result caps. Between the fully documented schema, annotations, and description, an agent has everything needed to call it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters (including both enums and defaults), making 3 the baseline. The description's filter/sort mentions largely restate enum values, though the billing note for max_results marginally enriches it.

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 and resource ("Search Google News") plus the input types (topic, company, person), which inherently separates it from sibling verticals like search_google_shopping, search_google_images, and search_google_videos. An agent can tell what it does and which domain it covers without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly names use cases ("current events, company and competitor news monitoring, and research"), giving clear context for when to reach for it. It stops short of naming a when-not condition or a specific alternative sibling to prefer, so it is strong context without full routing guidance.

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