web_search_recent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It identifies the backend (DuckDuckGo) but fails to disclose rate limits, pagination, or the exact meaning of 'recency window' beyond the freshness parameter.

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 a single short sentence with no wasted words. However, it could be slightly more structured to front-load key 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?

With 4 parameters, 25% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is too brief to fully inform an agent. It omits return format, behavior for invalid parameters, and the exact filtering behavior.

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 only 25% (only freshness described). The description adds 'via DuckDuckGo's date filter' but does not explain other parameters (num, lang, query) beyond what the schema provides, failing to compensate for the low coverage.

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 it is a web search restricted to a recency window via DuckDuckGo's date filter. It specifies the resource (web search) and the unique scope (recency), distinguishing it from sibling tools like web_search.

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 implies usage for recent results but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., web_search) or when not to use it.

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