deep_research_ddgs

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explains that results are aggregated, scored, and deduplicated, but does not mention read-only nature, rate limits, auth requirements, or the scoring algorithm. The description gives moderate insight but lacks important operational details.

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 very concise: two sentences that front-load the core purpose and key behaviors. Every sentence adds value without any fluff or repetition. It earns its place.

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 complexity (4 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers the essential purpose and behaviors. It doesn't detail the output structure, but the presence of an output schema mitigates that need. It provides sufficient context for an agent to understand the tool's role and how it differs from siblings.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters clearly. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides; it only restates the overall process. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Perform deep research across multiple search terms using ONLY DuckDuckGo.' It specifies the resource (DuckDuckGo) and the actions (aggregates, scores, removes duplicates). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like deep_research_google by explicitly limiting to DuckDuckGo.

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 lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., deep_research, deep_research_google). It does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use criteria, nor does it mention any prerequisites or contraindications.

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