flycrawl_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does: it declares read-only live behavior, the FLYCRAWL_API_KEY requirement, 1-credit-per-request billing, ad/sponsored-link stripping, and the error return shape. That is authorization, cost, and failure-mode disclosure an agent needs before calling a billable external tool.

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?

Front-loaded lead sentence followed by clearly labeled sections, so scanning is fast. The labeled blocks are slightly ceremonial for a two-parameter tool, but every line conveys distinct information with no filler.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by stating the return is Markdown summaries or structured error JSON. Combined with auth, cost, and freshness notes, nothing essential for a correct call is missing.

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 100%, so both 'query' and 'limit' are already documented in the schema. The description adds only indirect hints ('top search results', 'result summaries') and no format or syntax guidance beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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+resource (search the live web) plus the distinguishing behavior (auto-scraping top results into Markdown in one call). The explicit 'DIFFERENCE FROM flycrawl_scrape' line lets an agent separate this from its closest sibling without opening either schema.

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 contrasts keyword-driven search with URL-driven scrape, which is precisely the selection decision an agent must make among these siblings. No exclusions are stated for the remaining siblings, but the primary ambiguity is resolved directly.

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