Search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-redundant behavior: results are only titles and links (not page content), which is why a separate fetch is needed. No rate-limit or authentication context is given.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, and the core capability is front-loaded ahead of the follow-up instruction. Every clause earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be restated; the description still helpfully notes the titles-and-links shape. For a single-parameter search tool this is nearly complete, missing only sibling differentiation among the many search tools.

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?

There is a single 'query' parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents it. The description adds no syntax, format, or query-construction guidance beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 correct.

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 public web) and even the return shape (titles and links), so the agent knows exactly what it produces. It does not distinguish itself from competing siblings like web-search, ai-search, or x-search, which is the only gap.

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?

Explicitly routes the follow-up step: 'Use fetch with a result URL to read the page,' naming the alternative tool and the condition that selects it. It gives no guidance on when to prefer this over the other search siblings (web-search, ai-search), so it is clear but incomplete.

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