web_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that results are 'compact JSON' and 'at most 10 results per page,' which is useful. However, it doesn't discuss other behaviors like rate limits, caching, or the fact that it's a read-only operation. The transparency is adequate but not rich.

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 extremely concise: three sentences that front-load the core purpose, followed by usage guidance and a behavioral note. Every sentence earns its place 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?

The tool is simple, and the output schema exists, so return values are covered. The description provides all necessary context: what it does, when to use it, authentication (none), and a key behavioral constraint (max 10 results). It is complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema—it clarifies the default language ('en') despite the schema saying null, and confirms the page numbering. This is helpful but not transformative.

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: 'Search the public web via SCOUTS-AI and return compact JSON results.' It uses a specific verb ('search') and resource ('the public web'), and is straightforward with no ambiguity.

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 explicit guidance on when to use the tool: 'Use this when the user asks a question that requires current information, fresh context, or citations from the open web.' It also notes that no API key is required. While it doesn't mention when not to use it, the context is clear enough for an AI agent.

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