web_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses output behavior (additive v3 evidence, routing receipts, provider attempts, cache provenance, typed errors), which is valuable beyond a simple 'returns results'. It lacks rate limits or auth info but covers key behavioral aspects.

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 one sentence and efficiently conveys the core function. However, it is dense with jargon ('Web Search Plus v3 runtime', 'additive v3 evidence', 'routing receipts') which may reduce clarity, but remains appropriately sized.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must describe return values — it mentions evidence, receipts, provider attempts, cache provenance, and errors. However, it does not explain the actual result structure or pagination behavior, and given the tool's complexity (14 params), more context would be beneficial.

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?

All 14 parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no param-level detail, but the schema already explains each parameter adequately.

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 it performs web search ('Source-only web search') and specifies the runtime and routing behavior. It distinguishes from sibling web_extract by emphasizing 'source-only', making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

Usage is implied via 'Source-only web search' — indicating it is for searching, not extraction. However, no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance is provided, so it falls short of full clarity.

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