Web Search

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: it returns only snippets (not full content), costs credits, and prohibits auto-scraping. This goes beyond the annotations, covering cost and usage policy, though it doesn't discuss error handling or rate limits.

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 only two sentences but conveys purpose, output, cost, limitations, and usage guidance without redundancy. It is front-loaded with the core action and immediately informative.

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 simple search tool with high schema coverage and readOnly annotations, the description is fully complete: it states the return fields, cost, snippet-only behavior, and when to use the alternative scrape tool. No output schema exists, but the description covers the necessary return information.

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 schema provides complete descriptions for all three parameters (query, language, categories), resulting in 100% schema coverage. The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, so it rests at the baseline of 3.

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 action ('Search the web') and its output ('return up to 10 SERP results'), including specific fields. It also differentiates from siblings by noting it returns snippets only and pointing to metalift_scrape for full content, eliminating ambiguity.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Answer simple questions from snippets; do not auto-scrape' and 'Call metalift_scrape separately only when full page content is required.' This tells the agent exactly when to use this tool versus the alternative, plus cost implications (2 credits per search).

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