Web Research (search + read + cite)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It discloses the pipeline (search, fetch, clean, provide provenance) and output nature. However, it leaves 'top results' ambiguous and does not mention potential latency, failure modes, or what 'clean content' entails.

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?

Two sentences deliver all key information: the action, the output, and the ideal use case. No redundant filler or restatement of the title.

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?

For a tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the return value (clean content with provenance) and when to use it. It does not over-explain; the schema covers parameter details. Minor omissions about practical limitations are acceptable given the concise scope.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema (query and n with default 3). The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so it only meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 a specific multi-step action: 'search the web, fetch the top results, and return their clean content bundled with full provenance per source.' It distinguishes the tool from siblings (web_search, web_read) by emphasizing the one-shot combined operation and citation-ready output.

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 gives a clear use case: 'Ideal for grounding an answer with citations.' It implies when to use this tool over web_search/web_read (when both search and read are needed together), though it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions.

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