search_and_fetch

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions automatic rendering for JS-heavy pages and the rendered parameter, but doesn't address critical behavioral aspects like rate limits, authentication requirements, error conditions, what 'content extraction' entails, or how results are structured. For a complex 15-parameter tool with no annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 appropriately concise with two sentences that each serve a purpose. The first sentence states the core functionality, and the second provides important behavioral context about rendering. There's no wasted verbiage, though it could be slightly more structured for clarity.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (15 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how results are structured, what 'citation metadata' includes, or how the various search parameters interact. For a tool that both searches and fetches content, users need more context about the output format and behavioral constraints.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 15 parameters, the description fails to provide any meaningful parameter semantics. It only mentions the 'rendered' parameter briefly but doesn't explain what any of the other 14 parameters do, their expected formats, or how they affect the search and fetch behavior. This leaves most parameters undocumented.

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 states the tool's purpose: 'Search SearXNG and fetch the top results with content extraction and citation metadata.' It specifies both the search action and the fetch/extraction functionality, distinguishing it from simpler search-only siblings like 'search' or 'search_many'.

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 description provides some implied usage guidance by mentioning 'Rendered fetch is automatic for JS-heavy pages; set rendered=True to force browser mode.' However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search' or 'fetch_url', nor does it provide clear exclusion criteria or prerequisites for usage.

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