research_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states only the action 'Perform a web search' and doesn't disclose whether results are stored (despite the sessionId parameter suggesting persistence), rate limits, or auth requirements. The behavior is underspecified.

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 7-word sentence with zero filler or redundancy. It is appropriately compact for a straightforward search operation, though a bit more context would improve it, there is no wasted text.

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 has no output schema, no annotations, and sits among many research and search siblings. The one-sentence description does not clarify return format, session interaction, or how it differs from research_fetch_url or search_crypto_news. It is under-specified for an agent to select and invoke confidently.

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 descriptions cover all three parameters (query, section, sessionId) at 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but the schema itself provides adequate semantic cues, including that sessionId stores results.

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 uses a specific verb ('Perform') and resource ('web search') and scopes it to cryptocurrency research. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like search_crypto_news or get_crypto_news, leaving ambiguity about whether this covers general web pages or only news.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tools are mentioned, leaving the agent without decision support in a large sibling toolset.

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