web_search

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

The description discloses the multi-provider routing and explicit-only behavior for some providers, but lacks information on error handling, response format, rate limits, or other behavioral traits. Without annotations, this is insufficient for a tool with 10 parameters.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and efficiently conveys the multi-provider routing. While the list of providers is long, it is relevant and concise.

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 complexity (10 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description fails to explain return values, error behavior, or overall workflow. It is insufficient for full contextual understanding.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal context beyond the schema, such as the explicit-only behavior of certain providers, but does not significantly enhance understanding of parameters.

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 is a web search tool using multi-provider routing, listing many supported providers. It effectively distinguishes from the sibling tool 'web_extract' by focusing on search rather than extraction.

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 mentions that some providers are explicit-only and not auto-routed unless auto_allow is changed, giving some guidance on provider selection. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the sibling 'web_extract' or provide scenarios where alternatives are preferred.

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