extract-info-from-search

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

With no annotations, the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits. It does not indicate whether the tool is read-only, mutates state, requires authentication, or what side effects occur. The phrase 'extract' is not clarified.

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 extremely brief (4 words), but it sacrifices clarity for brevity. It is not front-loaded with key information and omits essential details, making it under-specified rather than 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 lack of annotations, output schema, and the tool's potential relation to 'search-web', the description is inadequate. It does not explain what the tool returns, how it uses the queries, or how it differs from a regular search. The tool appears to be for refining or summarizing previous searches, but this is not conveyed.

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 input schema provides a clear description for the only parameter: 'List of search queries to merge'. The tool description adds no value and even introduces confusion by using 'extract' instead of 'merge'. Schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 says 'Extract relative information from previous searches', which is vague. The term 'relative' is ambiguous (likely meant 'relevant'), and 'previous searches' is unclear—does it mean past user searches or the provided queries? The schema indicates the tool merges queries, but the description doesn't align, causing confusion.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search-web'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or any criteria for appropriate usage.

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