web_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden. It mentions simultaneous multi-engine searching and returns formatted results, but does not disclose rate limits, error handling for failed engines, or blocking behavior. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 brief and well-structured, starting with the main purpose and then listing parameters in a clear args format. Every sentence serves a purpose with 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?

The tool has an output schema (not shown but indicated), so the description does not need to detail return values. With three parameters and a fairly broad search function, the description adequately covers the essentials, though more details on result format would be beneficial.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that the query must be non-empty, lists the available engines (partially compensating for missing enums), and specifies the limit range (1-50). However, it does not explain the default behavior when 'engines' is null.

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 verb 'search' and the resource 'web', and specifies the distinctive feature of using multiple search engines simultaneously. This differentiates it from the sibling tool 'fetch_web_content' which likely retrieves content from a single URL.

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 implies usage for multi-engine web searches but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over the sibling or when not to use it. No exclusion criteria or alternative suggestions are provided.

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