search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the use of DuckDuckGo HTML, no API key requirement, the smart ladder bypass, and the return format including error handling. It doesn't mention rate limits or other limitations, but for a search tool it is fairly transparent.

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 mostly concise but repeats the return format twice (once as a list, once as a structured object). The 'smart ladder' phrase is vague. Overall, it is structured and not overly verbose.

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 tool's simplicity, the description covers usage guidance, return format, and error handling. However, it fails to explain parameters and does not mention any rate limits or usage constraints. With no annotations, more detail on parameters and limitations 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%, so the description must compensate. It does not explain the 'limit' or 'prefer' parameters, and only implies the query. This leaves ambiguity about what these parameters control, especially 'prefer' which is unclear. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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 'Web search via DuckDuckGo HTML' which identifies the verb (search) and resource (web via DuckDuckGo). It also differentiates from siblings like deep_research and web_search, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly provides when-to-use guidance: targeted searches needing anti-bot bypass, with alternatives for simple searches (web_search) and research questions (deep_research). Also mentions the smart ladder for bot detection, leaving no ambiguity about selection.

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