WET - Web Extended Toolkit

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds valuable context about the underlying search engines (SearXNG for web search, auto-indexing for docs) and points to the 'help' tool for full documentation, which provides additional behavioral information beyond annotations.

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 efficiently structured with a clear opening sentence followed by bullet points for each action type. Every sentence earns its place by providing specific guidance. The final sentence about the 'help' tool is appropriately brief and adds necessary context without redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (8 parameters, multiple action types) and the presence of annotations and output schema, the description provides good context about when to use different search types. However, it doesn't fully explain the parameter relationships or provide examples, leaving some gaps despite the structured data support.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for 8 parameters, the description only partially compensates. It mentions that 'query' is required for all actions and 'library' is required for docs search, but doesn't explain the purpose of 'action', 'version', 'categories', 'max_results', or 'limit' parameters. The description adds some meaning but leaves most parameters unexplained.

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 as searching across three distinct domains (web, academic papers, library documentation) with specific verbs and resources. It explicitly distinguishes this tool from its sibling 'help' by mentioning that tool is for documentation, while this one performs actual searches.

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 each action type: 'search' for web search, 'research' for academic/scientific search, and 'docs' for library documentation search. It specifies required parameters for each action and mentions language for disambiguation in docs search, giving clear context for choosing among alternatives.

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