Web Search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds significant behavioral context: routing to cheapest quality engine, cache hits, automatic failover, and metadata in response. No contradictions; it enriches understanding beyond annotations.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds unique information: the engine orchestration, the response shape, and use cases. No redundancy or unnecessary words.

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 complexity of the tool (7 parameters, multiple engines, output schema present), the description covers key aspects: what it does, how it routes, what it returns (including metadata), and when to use it. The output schema is noted in context, so return values are covered. Complete and self-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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the routing logic for 'mode' and auto-detection for 'freshness'. It clarifies how parameters interact with GroundRoute's decision-making, which goes beyond the schema's individual 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 it searches the live web via GroundRoute, with specific verb and resource. It explains the multi-engine routing logic, distinguishing it from a simple search. No siblings exist, but the description is self-contained and precise.

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 explicitly lists use cases: current-information, documentation, news, API, or research lookup. It provides context on when to use the tool, but no exclusions or alternatives since no siblings. The usage guidance is clear and helpful.

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