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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It adds meaningful context: the underlying provider (Tavily via x402), the output type (fresh results plus a brief answer), and a hard cost of $0.02 USDC. It does not mention rate limits or failure modes, but for a simple search tool these disclosures are substantial.

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 a single sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, names the integration channel, states the output format, and appends the cost in a compact and readable way.

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?

For a two-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides a reasonable orientation but leaves gaps: the meaning of 'limit', the structure of the returned response, and explicit differentiation from ru_search and other Russian tools. It is adequate but not complete.

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 0%, and the description does not compensate. The phrase 'по запросу' only restates that the tool answers a query, providing no additional meaning for the 'query' parameter. The 'limit' parameter is not explained at all, leaving its effect on result count entirely implicit.

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 'Глобальный веб-поиск' (global web search), a specific verb and resource, and states the deliverable: 'fresh results and a brief answer per query.' The word 'global' clearly distinguishes it from the Russian-focused sibling tools such as ru_search, ru_page, and ru_research.

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 'global' qualifier gives clear context that this tool is for international/non-Russian queries, and the sibling set of Russian-specific search tools reinforces that distinction. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to alternatives.

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