bing_query_to_pages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only describes parameters and defaults but does not mention pagination, data freshness, rate limits, or whether results are historical or real-time. The mutation aspect (if any) 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 concise and well-structured with a one-liner followed by a parameter list. Every sentence adds value, though it could be more compact.

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?

The description covers input parameters adequately but does not describe the output schema or return format despite its existence. For a moderate-complexity tool with 4 parameters and an output schema, this is a minor gap.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description's docstring explains each parameter's meaning and defaults (e.g., 'Exact query string', 'YYYY-MM-DD format'), adding value beyond the schema's bare titles.

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 finds which Bing pages rank for a given query, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from siblings like bing_keywords (which finds keywords) and bing_top_pages (which shows top pages generally).

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 provides parameter details but no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like bing_page_query_matrix. There is no indication of prerequisites or exclusionary criteria.

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