search_harvester

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states 'passive only, no active probing' but does not cover authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects. Lacks detail on return format or data persistence.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. The first sentence packs the core purpose and constraints, the second adds legal guidance. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple tool with 2 params and no output schema, the description explains inputs and outputs (emails, people, subdomains). Lacks details on error handling or result sizes, but sufficient for basic use.

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 50% (only json_output described). The description adds context for the domain parameter by mentioning it is for organization/domain recon, but does not provide syntax or detailed semantics. Baseline 3 due to partial compensation.

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 performs passive recon via theHarvester, listing specific outputs (emails, people, subdomains). It distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'passive' and 'public sources', contrasting with other search tools.

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?

Includes an authorization warning ('Authorized use only') and notes the passive nature. Does not explicitly compare to sibling tools, but the description implies it's for passive domain recon, which is sufficient context.

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