search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: returns accurate results and complete summaries, supports time range and pagination, and limits to 10 results per request. However, it does not explicitly state it is read-only or describe other characteristics like error handling or delays.

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 brief yet informative, using bullet points to list features. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and efficient in conveying essential information without unnecessary detail.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description should compensate by explaining the return format. It mentions results and summaries but not their structure (e.g., list of links with snippets). It also lacks details on error handling or rate limits, leaving the tool incompletely specified.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions features that correspond to parameters (time range, summary, pagination) but does not add new meaning beyond the schema. The phrasing 'results accurate, summaries complete' relates to output, not parameters.

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 the tool's purpose: performing web searches across the entire web to retrieve page information and links. The verb 'search' and resource 'web pages' are specific, and there are no sibling tools requiring differentiation.

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 mentions features like time filtering, summaries, and pagination, and states it is 'more suitable for AI use', implying a target use case. However, since there are no sibling tools, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use alternatives or exclusions. Usage is implied but not explicit.

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