brave_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions privacy features and result structure, but does not cover important behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or response format details. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with potential API constraints.

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 front-loaded and concise, consisting of two sentences that efficiently convey the tool's function and key features. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it easy to understand at a glance.

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 complexity of a search tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values, error cases, or operational constraints. While it covers basic purpose and privacy, more context is needed for effective use, especially without annotations.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining parameter interactions or usage examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 with specific verbs ('Web search via Brave Search API') and resources ('structured results with titles, URLs, descriptions, and snippets'). It distinguishes itself from siblings by emphasizing privacy-focused features ('Privacy-focused, no tracking'), which is unique among the listed tools.

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 web searches with privacy considerations, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other search tools like google_maps_places or semantic_scholar_search). It provides context about privacy but lacks specific exclusions or comparisons.

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