search_webkr

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the basic function. No mention of pagination, sorting behavior, result count, rate limits, or auth requirements. The schema provides parameter definitions but not operational behavior.

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 a single sentence, immediately front-loaded with the key verb and resource. It is appropriately concise, though it borders on under-specification by omitting any further 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 the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about what the search returns or how to use the parameters effectively. It does not, leaving the tool's complete behavior and output structure unspecified. For a simple request, it may suffice, but it is not 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 already provides 100% coverage for all four parameters with clear descriptions (e.g., 'query' as '검색어', 'display' as '한 번에 가져올 결과 수'). The description adds no additional parameter meaning or usage context beyond what the schema already conveys, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 action ('Perform a search') and the resource ('Naver Web Documents'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_news or search_blog. However, it could be more explicit about what 'Web Documents' encompasses, though it is otherwise unambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool versus its many siblings (e.g., search_news, search_blog). The description only states what the tool does, not the contexts in which it is the appropriate choice.

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