search_archives

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output (list of snapshot URLs), enumerates six archive sources, and explicitly states what the tool does not do (extract content). This gives a clear behavioral picture for a simple search tool.

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 main action, then output description and a pointer to an alternative. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 simple one-parameter tool and an existing output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose, return type, and boundaries. The list of archive sources adds useful context beyond what structured fields would provide.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description implies the URL parameter is the target of the search ('Search all archive sources for snapshots of a URL'). However, it does not add any format or constraint details (e.g., encoding, absolute URL), leaving some ambiguity for a single parameter.

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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'all archive sources for snapshots of a URL'. It lists the specific archive sources and explicitly differentiates from sibling tools like remove_paywall by stating it does not extract content.

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 provides an explicit alternative: 'use remove_paywall for full article retrieval'. It implies the tool is for discovering snapshots, not fetching content. However, it does not differentiate from other siblings like get_from_archive, leaving some ambiguity.

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