tavily_web_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'live web' and 'highly optimized real-time' but fails to disclose behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication, response size, or whether it returns raw data or processed summaries. This is insufficient for an agent to anticipate 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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that conveys the core purpose without redundancy. It is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 a simple signature (1 param) and an output schema (not shown), so description doesn't need to explain returns. However, it lacks details on result structure, pagination, or error handling, which are useful for completeness. Still adequate for basic use.

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?

There is one parameter 'query' with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not elaborate on the query format, length limits, or whether it supports natural language or specific syntax. The agent must infer meaning from 'Search the live web', which is inadequate.

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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'live web using the Tavily API' for real-time technical answers, documentation, news, or updates. It distinguishes itself from siblings which are unrelated (emotion analysis, file operations, memory).

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 implies usage for real-time technical queries but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. It does not specify limitations (e.g., not for non-technical topics) or context for choosing this over other tools.

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