harness_search

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

No annotations are present. The description discloses that results are structured and that the tool completes in seconds. It does not detail auth requirements, rate limits, or error behavior, but for a straightforward search tool, this level of transparency is sufficient.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the key purpose, and contains no superfluous information. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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 simple parameters and lack of output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's behavior. It could be improved by briefly mentioning the output format, but the current description provides necessary context for selection and invocation.

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%, so parameter descriptions are present. The description adds value by explaining the default behavior for sources ('all available') and limit (5), and by contextualizing the search as quick and multi-source. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 quick multi-source search and lists the specific sources (Tavily, Brave, arXiv, PubMed). It explicitly contrasts with generating a full report, distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'harness_research'.

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 phrase 'without generating a full report' implies this tool is for quick searches when a full report is not needed. While it does not explicitly state when not to use it, the sibling names suggest 'harness_research' is for comprehensive reports, providing adequate guidance.

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