web_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the return format as a dict with 'results' list containing title, url, and content. It does not mention any destructive behavior, rate limits, or authentication, but for a search tool, this is reasonable and adds value beyond the schema.

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, structured as a docstring with Args and Returns sections. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy.

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 tool has 2 parameters, no nested objects, and an output schema exists. The description explains the return format. It could mention error handling or pagination, but for a straightforward search, it is sufficiently 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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description fully compensates by explaining 'query' as the search query and 'max_results' with default and maximum. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type definitions.

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 'Search the web via Ollama's hosted search API,' specifying the verb 'search' and the resource 'web.' It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'web_fetch', which is likely for fetching specific URLs, so purpose is clear and 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 implies that web_search is for general search queries, contrasting with the sibling 'web_fetch'. It specifies default and max values for max_results, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria.

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