generative_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states high-level behavior. It does not disclose potential external requests, rate limits, authentication needs, or that results are generated by an LLM. Minimal transparency.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action ('Generate an answer grounded in web search results'). Every word earns its place; no redundancy.

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 (5 params, nested object, no output schema), the description provides the core purpose and a key optional feature but lacks return format, error handling, or behavior of intermediate results. Adequate but incomplete.

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 highlights the scope parameter but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Other parameters remain unelaborated.

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 verb 'Generate' and the resource 'an answer grounded in web search results'. It also mentions optional source restrictions, distinguishing it from siblings like web_search (which returns raw results) and image_search.

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 when a generative answer is needed but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. Sibling tools are not contrasted.

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