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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It adds useful behavioral details: returns exactly top 10 results and costs 100 sats per call. However, it omits other aspects like response format, error handling, or whether the search is read-only. For a simple search tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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 extremely concise — one sentence of ten words — and every word adds value. It includes the operation, the result count, and the cost without any fluff.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should explain what the returned results contain (e.g., titles, URLs, snippets). It only states 'top 10 results' but not the structure. Cost is mentioned but not the payment context. For a search tool, missing return format is a significant gap.

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 schema provides 100% coverage for the single 'query' parameter with description 'Search query'. The tool description adds no further semantics about query formatting, length, or special syntax. Since schema already fully covers the parameter, the baseline of 3 applies.

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 clearly identifies the tool as a web search that returns top 10 results. While it lacks an explicit verb like 'perform', the noun phrase 'Web search' combined with 'returning top 10 results' effectively communicates the function. It distinguishes from sibling tools like verity_btc_price and verity_scrape, which are not general search.

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 usage is implied: use this when you need web search results. However, no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives are mentioned. The sibling tools are distinct enough that an agent can infer this is the general search tool, but the description itself offers no context on when it is preferable or when to avoid it.

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