metaso_search

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It mentions optional behaviors like includeSummary, includeRawContent, and conciseSnippet, which is helpful, but these mostly restate schema information. It does not disclose limitations, rate limits, or result-format expectations.

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 compact and well-structured with clear sections for scopes and features, front-loaded with a one-sentence summary. It avoids fluff, though the feature list overlaps with schema descriptions.

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?

For a tool with six parameters and no output schema, the description covers all input options, scopes, and feature behaviors sufficiently for correct invocation. It lacks explicit output format details, but for a search tool the return type is reasonably inferred and no output schema is required.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the meaning of each scope enum value and clarifying the effects of the boolean flags, which the schema's generic '搜索范围' description does not convey.

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 performs multi-dimensional search using Metaso AI, and enumerates supported scopes (webpage, document, paper, image, video, podcast). It distinguishes from the sibling metaso_reader by focusing on search, though it does not explicitly contrast with it.

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 provides clear context about the available scopes and default behavior, which implies how to choose a search type. However, it offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of metaso_reader, nor any when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria.

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