search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing beyond the verb. It does not say whether the search replaces the current page content in the tab, where results land (page navigation vs snapshot), or what the call returns. For a no-schema, no-annotation tool that mutates tab state, this is a significant gap.

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 clauses, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the routing rule. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage across three parameters, the definition is not complete enough. An agent still cannot tell what the call returns, which tab is targeted when tabId is missing, or what side effects occur on the page.

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 0% and there are 3 parameters, so the description must compensate. It adds one useful fact (default engine is baidu) but leaves tabId completely unexplained and says nothing about query semantics, despite tabId being the most ambiguous parameter.

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 web in a tab") and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling navigate tool for known URLs, so an agent can separate it from the navigation tools. The default engine is named, but the "in a tab" phrasing is slightly vague about whether an existing tab context is required.

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?

Gives clear use conditions: "Use for looking up information; use navigate for known URLs." The alternative is named and the selecting condition (known vs unknown URL) is explicit. It stops short of saying what to do when the tabId is absent or how engine choice should be made.

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