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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so safety and openness are covered structurally. The description adds genuinely new behavioral facts — a hard cap of 10 results and relevance ordering — which is real value beyond annotations, though it says nothing about rate limits, freshness, or empty-result behavior.

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?

A single waste-free sentence, front-loaded with the result count and ordering. It is efficient, though its brevity means it under-serves rather than over-serves.

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?

Output schema exists and annotations cover the safety profile, so return values and side effects needn't be restated. For a two-parameter open-web search among dozens of overlapping search siblings, the missing piece is routing guidance, which is left entirely to the agent.

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%, with both 'query' (1–300 chars) and optional 'country' (ISO-2) documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no semantics about the country parameter or the 10-result cap interacting with query breadth.

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 reports the result shape ('up to 10 public page titles, URLs and snippets') but never states the action verb — that it searches the public web. The title supplies 'Search public web', so an agent can infer purpose, but the description itself is a return-value statement rather than a purpose statement.

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?

No guidance on when to use this instead of the many other retrieval tools (exim__search__run, exim__crawl__run, exim__hscode__search, exim__kb__list). No mention that it targets open web rather than internal datasets, and no prerequisites or exclusions.

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