Baidu Search API

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states that output is structured JSON, omitting important scraping behaviors such as rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or whether raw HTML can be returned (though 'html' param exists). This is minimal disclosure.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every part ('Scrape', 'Baidu', 'Chinese-market', 'search results', 'structured JSON') contributes meaningful information, making it appropriately concise.

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 tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It lacks context about expected outputs, potential errors, usage limits, or prerequisites. The schema covers parameters well, but for a scraping tool, more behavioral context (e.g., rate limiting, blocked requests, language specifics) is needed to be complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, but it does not need to since all params are well documented. The 'Chinese-market' context in the description slightly reinforces the query semantics but adds no new detail.

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 uses a specific verb ('Scrape') and resource ('Baidu (Chinese-market) search results') and states the output as 'structured JSON'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling search tools like google_search and bing_search by specifying the Chinese-market scope.

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 when needing Chinese-market search results via the phrase 'Chinese-market', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. No alternative tools are mentioned, so guidance is merely implicit rather than explicit.

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