web_search

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

The description discloses substantial behavioral details beyond the annotations: it queries multiple engines, fetches full page content, scrubs prompt injections, chunks by semantic boundaries, and ranks by cosine similarity. This gives the agent a realistic expectation of processing scope and security measures, far exceeding the minimal readOnly/idempotent hints from annotations.

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 efficiently structured: a one-sentence purpose statement, a compact process overview, a clear usage trigger, and a concise return-format note. No word is wasted, and it is appropriately front-loaded with the primary action.

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?

Despite the tool's complexity, the description covers the core function, internal processing steps, usage context, and output structure. The presence of an output schema further fills in return details, so the description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool confidently.

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 does not explicitly mention the 'query' or 'render_js' parameters, despite schema description coverage being 0%. While the schema itself provides robust descriptions, the fail here is that the tool description adds no direct value for parameter selection, failing to compensate for the low coverage as required.

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 opens with 'Search the web and return ranked, content-rich results,' which clearly specifies the verb (search), resource (web), and output format (ranked results). It further details the multi-step process, making it unambiguous and distinguishing it from generic search tools.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use this when the user asks about current information, facts, documentation, or anything that requires up-to-date web results.' This provides clear, actionable guidance for an AI agent, even without sibling tools to compare against.

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