web_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does state the output format and surface-level behavior. However, it omits non-obvious traits such as rate limits, network/API dependencies, or the fact that it will not fetch page contents.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence that conveys the action, target, and result format with no filler. It is appropriately concise for such a simple tool.

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 output schema likely covers return values, so the description does not need to restate them, but it still leaves out usage routing and parameter context. For an agent deciding between web_search and its siblings, the description is minimally sufficient rather than 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?

The schema has 0% description coverage on parameters, and the description does not compensate by explaining `query` semantics or how `max_results` affects behavior. The parameter names are self-explanatory, but no additional meaning is added.

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 names a clear verb ('Search'), a resource ('the web'), and the return shape (list of title/url/snippet). It does not explicitly call out siblings like web_search_and_fetch, but the focus on returning a result list helps separate it from fetching page content.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to choose this tool over web_search_and_fetch or web_fetch, and no exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned. The 'list of results' phrasing only weakly implies it is for search metadata rather than full-page retrieval.

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