deep_search

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 discloses nothing about return format, side effects, or operational behavior—just a tagline. This is a significant gap for a tool that could be read-only or have download/implications.

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 concise sentence, but it's under-specified for a 9-parameter tool. It's memorable but doesn't provide enough operational detail to guide an agent, so it's not appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 description lacks essential context: what results look like, when to set clip, how output is returned, and how it differs from sibling tools. Given the high parameter count, rich schema, and no output schema, this bare-bones description is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 description itself adds no parameter information, but the schema provides detailed descriptions for all 9 parameters (100% coverage), including specific guidance like 'ALWAYS use tiny unless the user explicitly requests a different size.' This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 semantic audio search ('Search audio by meaning'), which distinguishes it from keyword-based search. However, it doesn't explicitly state the output (e.g., timestamps or matches) nor name sibling tools, so it's clear but not fully differentiated.

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 offers no guidance on when to use deep_search versus alternatives like search_audio or batch_search. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer entirely from the schema.

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