AgentSearch Web Search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden and does add two behavioral facts: it can run in direct or portal mode, and it returns structured JSON. However, it does not explain how the mode is selected, what limits apply, or what the JSON contains.

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, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and each sentence adds distinct information: what the tool does, how it connects, and what it returns. 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?

For a two-parameter search tool with a fully documented schema, the definition is nearly complete: it names the backend modes and the result format. The only real gap is the missing usage guideline relative to the sibling tool, which is already penalized separately.

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 100%, so the two parameters are already fully documented with query as a string and max_results as 1-10 default 5. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, which is acceptable at the high-coverage baseline.

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 first clause, 'Search the web via AgentSearch,' names the exact action and resource. The sibling is 'agentsearch_extract,' so the verb 'search' cleanly separates this tool from extraction, no schema inspection needed.

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 gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over agentsearch_extract, nor any conditions where direct versus portal mode should be used. Usage context is left entirely to inference.

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