webdata-tools-mcp

Search Google News

search_google_news

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search Google News by query, language, country and timeframe to return articles with publisher URLs, dates and related coverage. Supports operators and site filters.

Instructions

Search Google News (any language and country) and return articles with the publisher's real article URL, publisher, date and related coverage. Supports Google operators ("exact phrase", -exclude, OR, intitle:) and site filters. Runs the Apify Actor tacps126/google-news on your Apify account (about $0.002 per article; spend per call is capped at $0.5).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	Search query, e.g. "generative AI" or "tesla -musk".
`sites`	No	Limit to these publisher domains, e.g. ["reuters.com"].
`country`	No	Two-letter edition country, e.g. US, GB, DE.	US
`language`	No	Language code, e.g. en, de, fr.	en
`max_items`	No	Maximum results to return (default 20, max 200). Cost scales with this.
`timeframe`	No	Only articles newer than this.
`extra_input`	No	Advanced: extra Actor input fields, merged over the defaults.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tool`	Yes	Name of the tool that produced the result.
`count`	Yes	Number of records the Actor returned.
`items`	Yes	The records. Long text fields are shortened to 600 characters.
`shown`	Yes	Number of records included in `items` (can be lower than count when the result is long).
`truncated`	Yes	True when records were left out to keep the result short; ask for fewer items.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.1Oct 17, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Number of records the Actor returned.",
+      "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+      "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "items": {
+      "description": "The records. Long text fields are shortened to 600 characters.",
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": {},
+        "propertyNames": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "shown": {
+      "description": "Number of records included in `items` (can be lower than count when the result is long).",
+      "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+      "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "description": "Name of the tool that produced the result.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "truncated": {
+      "description": "True when records were left out to keep the result short; ask for fewer items.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "tool",
+    "count",
+    "shown",
+    "truncated",
+    "items"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld), and the description adds genuinely useful operational context: it runs on the user's Apify account, costs ~$0.002/article, and spend per call is capped at $0.5. It stops short of describing failure modes or how the cap is enforced.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three tight sentences that are front-loaded with purpose, then capabilities, then cost. Dense but every clause earns its place; no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present, return details need not be spelled out, and the description covers scope, cost, and account context for a 7-param nested-schema tool. Minor gaps remain around pagination or behavior when a query returns nothing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real semantic value by enumerating supported Google operators ("exact phrase", -exclude, OR, intitle:) that the plain query schema does not document, and it ties cost scaling to max_items.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Search Google News') plus the exact return payload (article URL, publisher, date, related coverage), which separates it cleanly from sibling search tools like search_indeed_jobs or search_reddit.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Conveys how to use it (Google operators, site filters, language/country scope) and flags the cost model, giving clear context for invocation. It does not, however, state when to prefer this over a sibling news/review source or any exclusions.

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

Deploy Server