search_browser

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only provides a generic search description and parameter list, without mentioning what is returned, matching behavior, or any side effects. This leaves the agent uncertain about the tool's behavior beyond the basic search action.

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 followed by a parameter list, with no unnecessary words. The parameter explanations are useful and directly support the schema, keeping the description focused and efficient.

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?

Since there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain the return value and how results are presented. It does not, and it also fails to relate this tool to sibling browser functions, leaving a significant completeness gap.

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 only provides names, types, and a default, so the description adds valuable meaning. It clarifies that query searches item names and enumerates all valid category values, which the schema does not include.

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 ('Search the browser') and target ('items matching a query'), which distinguishes it from navigation tools like browse_path or get_browser_items_at_path. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or contrast its scope.

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 given on when to use this tool versus other browser-related tools. The description only states the operation without any exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative recommendations.

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