ai-search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It reveals the tool returns diverse result types and supports streaming, which goes beyond a generic search description. It does not mention limitations or error conditions, but for a read-only search tool the core behavior is well-covered.

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 front-loaded: it starts with the core action, then enumerates outputs, mentions streaming, and ends with a usage constraint. Each sentence contributes distinct, useful information with no repetition or 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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters all documented in the schema and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the return types and adds usage context. It could have mentioned the freshness filter or count behavior, but those are already in the schema, so the description is adequate 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining that 'AI-generated answers' and 'follow-up questions' are part of the output, which elaborates the 'answer' parameter's effect. It also mentions streaming, reinforcing the 'stream' parameter usage.

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 performs a search via Bocha AI Search API, a specific resource distinct from the sibling 'web-search'. It also lists concrete output types (web results, images, multimodal cards, AI answers, follow-up questions), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 an explicit usage rule: 'Use only when specifically requested by the user.' This is a clear contextual guideline, though it does not directly name alternatives or contrast with the sibling tool. The rule effectively narrows the appropriate use case.

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