brave_summarizer

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

Annotations only include openWorldHint=true, offering no read/destructive hints. The description carries the burden and does so well: it says 'Retrieves' and 'Returns a text summary,' clearly implying a non-mutating read operation. It also discloses the subscription requirement. While it doesn't discuss error handling or rate limits, for a read-only summarizer the key behavioral traits are covered.

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 well-structured with a clear opening statement, a bulleted 'When to use' section, return details, and requirements. Each section is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. No redundant sentences; every part earns its place.

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?

With 3 parameters, no output schema, and only openWorldHint annotation, the description covers the return type ('text summary'), prerequisite workflow, and optional features. It does not explain potential errors or the exact format of the key beyond referencing the response model, but for a tool of this simplicity it is largely complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by linking the optional boolean parameters to their features ('inline references to source URLs' and 'additional entity information'). It also explains the source of the required 'key' by referencing the prior web search with summary=true, which is crucial for parameter usage. This goes beyond the schema's minimal description.

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 a specific verb ('Retrieves AI-generated summaries'), a clear resource (web search results via Brave's Summarizer API), and explicitly differentiates from sibling search tools by focusing on summarization rather than search. It is immediately obvious what the tool does.

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 an explicit 'When to use' list with concrete scenarios (overviews, fact-checking, synthesis). It also states a hard prerequisite: 'Must first perform a web search using brave_web_search with summary=true parameter,' which effectively tells the agent the required precondition and the sibling tool to use. This is clear usage guidance.

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