tavily_map

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It only mentions multi API key rotation, which is an implementation detail, but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, rate limits, or any behavioral traits beyond the basic purpose.

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) but for a tool with 13 parameters, this brevity sacrifices needed detail. It is front-loaded with purpose but lacks structure for parameter guidance.

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 13 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and an output schema (unseen), the description completely fails to explain the return format or parameter behavior. It is highly incomplete for effective agent usage.

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 0% and the description does not explain any of the 13 parameters. The user gets no insight into how to configure url, max_depth, max_breadth, or other options.

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 '绘制网站结构地图' meaning 'draw website structure map', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like tavily_crawl (crawling) and tavily_search (searching) by focusing on mapping the site's structure.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives like tavily_crawl or tavily_extract. The description lacks context for appropriate usage scenarios.

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