web_search

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

The description discloses that it uses an anti-detect browser and that results are cached for a day, which is useful transparency. However, it does not mention potential rate limits, errors, or that it is a read-only operation. With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it provides some but not comprehensive behavioral details.

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 concise, using a compact format that conveys essential details (search engine, anti-detect, output fields, pagination, snippets, caching) without unnecessary fluff. Every word adds value.

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 gives enough context for a search tool: it indicates the output format (number, title, URL) and caching behavior. It does not specify return schema details but that is not required since the output schema is not provided. Overall, it covers necessary aspects for a basic search operation.

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?

The description explains pages (pagination for more URLs) and include_snippets (snippet under each URL), adding meaning beyond the bare schema. Query and max_results are self-explanatory. Since schema coverage is 0%, this description compensates well for two of the four parameters.

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 the tool performs a search in DuckDuckGo via an anti-detect browser, which is a specific action on a specific resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like fetch_page and browse by focusing on search rather than page fetching.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. It mentions pagination and snippet options but lacks context such as 'use when you need general web search results' or comparisons with other browsing tools. This is a significant gap given the many sibling tools.

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