search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses the return shape (ranked, numbered list with snippet and URL), the result cap (up to 20), and notable error-avoidance behavior ('Reports No results found for empty queries instead of erroring'). It doesn't cover cross-language behavior for `lang` or any rate/availability constraints, leaving a small gap.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then return shape, then routing guidance. Every sentence earns its place and nothing is repeated from the schema beyond a brief parenthetical.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must explain return values — and it does, describing the ranked numbered list, snippets, and URLs. Combined with the routing guidance to downstream tools, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 the schema already documents `query`, `lang`, and `limit`. The description only echoes the `limit` cap (already in the schema as 'max 20'), adding no new semantic detail. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Search Wikipedia for articles matching a query') and explicitly positions itself as 'the entry point when you don't know the exact article title,' which distinguishes it from siblings like `summary` and `article_extract` that require a known title.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('when you don't know the exact article title') and names the downstream alternatives with their distinct purposes: `summary` for the gist, `article_extract` for full text, `links` to explore outward. The routing logic is fully spelled out.

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