search_perplexity

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'AI-powered search with sources' which implies some intelligence and citation capability, but doesn't describe what 'sources' means, how results are formatted, whether there are rate limits, authentication requirements, or any other behavioral characteristics. The timeout parameter is mentioned but its behavioral implications aren't explained.

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 appropriately concise with two sentences that directly address purpose and parameters. It's front-loaded with the core functionality. The second sentence could be slightly more integrated, but overall there's minimal waste.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what format results come in, what 'sources' means, how the AI-powered aspect manifests, or how this differs from other search tools. Given the complexity implied by 'AI-powered' and the lack of structured output documentation, more completeness is 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value by restating parameter names and the timeout default, but doesn't provide additional semantic context beyond what's in the schema descriptions. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 'AI-powered search with sources', which specifies the verb (search) and resource (AI-powered results with sources). It distinguishes from generic search by mentioning 'AI-powered', but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling AI search tools like search_chatgpt or search_gemini.

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 the many sibling search alternatives (search_bing_search, search_chatgpt, search_google_search, etc.). There's no mention of when this tool is preferred, what makes it unique among the search options, or any prerequisites for use.

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