search_platform

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it specifies browser session authorization, read-only nature, and that fetched content is untrusted evidence. This aligns with readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, providing useful safety and data quality context.

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?

Two sentences with front-loaded purpose and direct behavioral disclosure. Every word adds value, no fluff.

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 description covers purpose and key behavioral traits but lacks guidance on parameter usage and return value structure. With 7 parameters and an output schema present, more detail on input options would improve completeness.

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 0%. The description only implicitly references 'platform' and 'query' but explains none of the 7 parameters, including 'max_pages', 'time_range', 'follow_links', and 'auth_strategy'. This is a significant gap.

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 'Search a user-specified platform...and return evidence', specifying verb and resource. However, the schema constrains platform to 'x', making the 'user-specified' claim slightly misleading, but the overall purpose is clear.

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 searching with browser sessions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings like collect_platform_evidence or read_url. No when-not guidance is provided.

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