Search Web

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly discloses the backend (DuckDuckGo), lack of API key requirement, and the plain-text result format. This gives the agent a good understanding of what the tool does, though it does not mention potential rate limits or failure modes.

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 compact and well-structured, with the core purpose stated first, followed by a clear parameter list and return format. No filler or redundant prose. Every sentence provides useful information.

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?

For a relatively simple search tool, the description covers the essential aspects: what it searches, how results are returned, and parameter meanings. The output schema covers the return structure, so the text description of return values is a helpful addition. It could mention behavior on no results or network errors, but these are minor gaps for a search tool.

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?

The description provides meaning for the 'query' parameter, which is entirely undocumented in the schema, by calling it the search keyword. For 'max_results', it restates the schema's purpose but adds no new information. Since schema coverage is only 50%, the description compensates for the gap on the required 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: search the web and return a list of titles, links, and summaries. This directly distinguishes it from sibling fetch_* tools, which are focused on retrieving specific URLs or RSS feeds. The mention of DuckDuckGo and no API key adds specificity.

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 intended use is implied by the tool's name and description: use it when you need to search the web rather than fetch known URLs or feeds. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings like fetch_web or fetch_rss, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives.

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