search_chatgpt

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 'timeout' parameter which hints at potential delays, but doesn't describe what 'ChatGPT with web search' actually does behaviorally - whether it returns web results, generates responses based on web content, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what format results come in. For a search tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 extremely concise - just two sentences that get straight to the point. However, the second sentence about parameters feels redundant given the comprehensive schema. The structure is front-loaded with the core purpose first, which is good, but could be more efficient by eliminating the parameter restatement.

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 inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'ChatGPT with web search' means operationally, what kind of results to expect, or how it differs from other search tools. Given the rich sibling context with many alternative search engines, this description leaves too many questions unanswered about when and why to use this specific tool.

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 fully documents both parameters. The description adds minimal value by restating parameter names and types that are already in the schema. It does mention 'default 90' for timeout which is already in the schema's default field. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does all the work.

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 'ChatGPT with web search' which indicates it performs search functionality using ChatGPT. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'ChatGPT' rather than other search engines like Bing or Google. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with other ChatGPT-related tools that might exist.

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 tools (search_bing_search, search_google_search, search_claude, etc.). There's no indication of what makes ChatGPT search different or when it might be preferred over alternatives. The agent receives no usage context beyond the tool name.

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