brave_query

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavior burden. It usefully discloses the plan requirement and API key env var (GEOSEO_BRAVE_API_KEY) and describes the return shape, but says nothing about rate limits, latency, failure modes, or quota costs.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and return shape, followed by differentiation and the access requirement. No filler or repetition.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be re-explained, and the auth requirement is covered. However, the absence of any parameter guidance and lack of cost/limit behavior leaves clear gaps for a query tool with three undocumented parameters.

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%, so the description must compensate for all three parameters. It says nothing about 'question', 'country', or 'language' – no expected formats, code conventions, or defaults – leaving every parameter undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Ask Brave's AI Answers, grounded in Brave Search') and the return shape (answer + cited URLs). It also distinguishes itself from similar query siblings like perplexity_query and openai_query by noting Brave's independent web index, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Implies usage ('a useful extra signal next to Google/Bing-backed engines'), giving an agent a rough sense of when to prefer it. But it never explicitly names alternatives such as perplexity_query or multi_llm_query, nor does it state exclusions or when not to use it.

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