Kagi web search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It mentions the return format (titles, URLs, dates, snippets) and operator support, but does not disclose potential side effects, rate limits, authentication requirements, or error behavior. This is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 concise (two sentences) and well-structured, with the main purpose front-loaded. Every sentence adds necessary information without redundancy or filler.

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 tool has 7 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the return format and parameter usage. It mentions all key features, though it could include more details on edge cases or advanced 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of parameters (e.g., 'Use from_date/to_date to restrict by publication date') and the capabilities of the query (supports operators), which goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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: 'Search the web with Kagi (high-quality, ad-free results).' It specifies the return fields (titles, URLs, dates, snippets) and distinguishes itself from siblings like kagi_lenses and kagi_news by being a general web search tool.

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 guidance on using parameters like from_date/to_date, page, region, and lens, and mentions query operators. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., when to use kagi_news instead) or state when not to use this tool, missing some explicit context.

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