Baidu Search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it says almost nothing. It implies a read-only search, but discloses no authentication/session requirements (profile param), no NAS connection dependency (host/port/scheme), no result limits, and no failure modes. This is a significant gap for a 9-parameter remote search tool.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with zero waste, but the brevity borders on under-specification rather than economy; there is room for one or two sentences of routing and scope detail.

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 9 parameters, no annotations, and connection/session parameters (host, port, scheme, profile) that imply non-trivial setup, the one-sentence description is not complete enough for an agent to call this reliably. The existence of an output schema excuses it from explaining return values, but nothing else is covered.

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 description coverage is 67%, and the description adds nothing beyond the required keyword. Several parameters (limit, recursive, category) have no descriptions in the schema either, and the description does not explain what category/recursive mean for Baidu Netdisk search results or how dir scopes the search relative to the Netdisk root.

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 states a specific verb and resource: search Baidu Netdisk files (搜索百度网盘文件). This distinguishes it from the NAS-local file_search siblings by naming the Baidu Netdisk resource. However, it gives no scope or differentiation against adjacent Baidu siblings such as baidu_list or baidu_info.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives like file_search (local NAS search) or baidu_list (browsing Netdisk contents). The agent must infer all routing from the tool name alone.

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