Synthetic Search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, which the description is consistent with. It adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations: the output truncation limit (2000 lines or 50KB), the temp-file fallback when exceeded, and the result format. This is useful operational detail.

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?

Four sentences with no filler; the core purpose is front-loaded before usage guidance and truncation caveats. Each sentence contributes distinct information without redundancy. 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?

With no output schema, the description correctly carries the burden of explaining return values (titles, URLs, snippets), which it does. It also covers detail_level guidance and truncation behavior. Minor gap: no explicit mention of max_results defaults, but that is covered by the schema. Fairly complete for a search tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all four parameters with descriptions. The description adds modest usage nuance (recommending ai-summary for real questions, noting summary_prompt focuses the summarizer) but largely reinforces what the schema already states. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Search the web via Synthetic's Search API') and describes the output format (titles, URLs, text snippets). The purpose is unambiguous and complete. No siblings exist to differentiate from, but the core purpose is fully specified.

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?

Provides explicit internal usage guidance: recommends detail_level='ai-summary' for real questions, 'full' for complete text, and explains when summary_prompt should be supplied. Since no sibling tools are listed, it cannot name alternatives, but the in-tool routing guidance is clear and actionable.

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