Search pages

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses important behavioral traits: the default engine only indexes titles/descriptions, the result names the active engine, results carry no excerpt, and the engine choice determines applicability. This adds significant context and does not contradict any annotation.

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 front-loaded with the most important caveat, then provides a conditional alternative and a follow-up recommendation. Every sentence carries essential information with no filler or 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?

For a search tool with one required parameter, no output schema, and a read-only annotation, the description covers the key environmental constraints and behavioral expectations. It tells the agent what the results will not contain, how to detect the active engine, and how to route to sibling tools when needed.

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 input schema already describes all four parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add per-parameter semantics beyond mentioning follow-up retrieval with get_page, which is not parameter-specific.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource, 'Full-text search' over pages, and then differentiates itself from grep_pages by clarifying what the default engine indexes. It clearly tells an agent that search_pages searches page titles/descriptions on a basic engine, not the body text.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use search_pages versus grep_pages, conditioned on the active search engine and whether the target is inside a page's body. It also recommends following up with get_page when content is needed, giving direct when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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