brave_suggest

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that suggestions are fetched from public Brave Search suggest JSON and trimmed to the requested count. Locale defaults are also stated. Does not mention authorization or rate limits, but for a suggest endpoint, this is adequate.

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?

Three sentences, each providing essential information: purpose, return value, defaults, and source. No redundant or irrelevant content. Front-loaded with the primary action.

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 no output schema and 4 well-documented parameters, the description covers the core functionality. It explains the data source and trimming behavior. Missing details on return format (e.g., list of strings) and error handling, but these are inferred for a suggest 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 description adds extra context: 'query prefix' for q, 'trimmed to the requested count' for count, and locale defaults for country/lang. This goes beyond the schema descriptions, justifying above baseline.

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 suggests Brave search queries and returns autocomplete completions for a query prefix. It uses specific verbs ('Suggest', 'Returns') and distinguishes from sibling tools like brave_search by specifying 'autosuggest query completions'.

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 autocomplete without explicitly stating when not to use. However, the mention of 'autosuggest' and 'query prefix' makes it clear this is not for general search results. Does not name alternative tools like brave_search, but context with siblings signals its specific role.

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