search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that queries are sent to a search engine and results are returned, but does not state whether the tool is read-only, rate limits, error handling, or what happens with failed queries. The read-only nature is implied but not explicit.

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 concise with three sentences that are front-loaded. Every sentence adds useful context without unnecessary detail. No redundancy.

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 single-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains input (list of queries) and output (brief results with title, url, snippet). It lacks details on error handling or limits, but the tool's complexity is low, so completeness is sufficient.

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 a description that already mentions Google advanced operators. The tool description adds value by explaining parallel execution and output format (title, url, snippet), but does not significantly extend parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 performs web search in parallel using a list of queries and returns brief results with title, url, snippet. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tool 'browse' through the verb 'search', but no explicit differentiation is provided.

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 mentions parallel execution for multiple queries, implying batch use, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. the sibling 'browse' tool or alternative contexts. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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