Advanced Search: websearch

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

Annotations already provide readonly, nondestructive, idempotent, and open world hints. The description adds context that it returns real-time information and breaking news, which aligns with openWorldHint. It does not contradict annotations and adds useful behavioral insight beyond the structured fields.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds value. It is concise and well-structured without any wasted words.

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's simplicity (single required parameter, no output schema) and rich annotations, the description is mostly complete. It could optionally mention the nature of results (e.g., snippets, links), but for a search tool this is adequate. The complexity is low, so a 4 is appropriate.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, baseline is 3. The description adds no further detail about the 'query' parameter (e.g., format, length). The schema already describes it as 'The search query', so the description does not add extra semantic value.

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 'Search the web for current news, information, and announcements' and specifies it is for 'real-time market insights and breaking news'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly noting not to use it for real-time price data, which differentiates it from quote tools.

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 explicitly tells when to use (for current news, real-time market insights) and when not to use (not for real-time price data), and suggests an alternative: 'use quote tools instead'. This provides clear usage boundaries.

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