enrich_web

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool enriches context with web content but fails to describe key behaviors such as how it sources content, potential rate limits, authentication needs, or what the output looks like. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that presumably performs web queries.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, though it could be more structured by explicitly separating purpose from constraints. Overall, it's appropriately sized for the minimal information it conveys.

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 complexity (web content enrichment), lack of annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the enrichment process, output format, or error handling, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use the tool effectively beyond a basic understanding.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It doesn't mention the 'query' parameter at all, providing no semantic meaning beyond what the schema's pattern hint suggests (1-3 words). This is inadequate for a tool with one required parameter, as the agent lacks context on what constitutes an effective query.

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 states the tool 'enrich context with web content' which provides a general purpose (verb+resource), but it's vague about what specific type of enrichment occurs and how it differs from sibling tools like 'enrich_news'. The phrase 'focused on general, non-commercial web content' adds some differentiation but remains broad and non-specific.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'enrich_news' or 'ask_fastgpt'. It mentions 'general, non-commercial web content' which implies a context but doesn't specify use cases, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving the agent with minimal direction.

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