search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the main behavior (search + fetch full content) but omits details about external service rate limits, potential failures, or whether the operation is read-only. The mention of 'full content' gives some context beyond a basic search.

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 a single, concise sentence that clearly states the core function without unnecessary detail. It is front-loaded and every word 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?

The description explains the high-level behavior but lacks details about the return structure since there is no output schema. Given the simplicity of the tool, it is adequate but does not describe result format or error handling, leaving some gaps.

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%, and the description does not add any extra parameter meaning. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema already fully explains query, limit, and maxContentLength.

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 searches the web via Serper API and fetches full content from each result, which distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'fetch_page_content' that presumably only fetches content from a given URL. The verb 'search' and resource 'web' are specific.

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 implies usage for searching and retrieving content but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like 'fetch_page_content'. No exclusion criteria or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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