bing_block_url_add

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits like immediacy, side effects, or prerequisites. It only states the basic action, omitting whether the site must already be verified, if blocks take effect instantly, or what happens when a block already exists.

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 concise at one sentence, but it is under-specified. It could include more useful details (e.g., prerequisites, note about directory blocking) without becoming overly long.

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 tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fails to cover important context such as prerequisites (verified site), success/error responses, blocking rules, or how blocking affects search results.

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?

The description adds no extra meaning beyond the input schema. The schema already covers site_url, entity_type (with values 0/1 for Page/Directory), and date (optional expiry). However, blocked_url lacks a schema description and is not clarified in the tool description.

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 action (block) and resource (URL or directory) within Bing search. However, it does not distinguish this add operation from the sibling tool bing_block_url_remove, which is its inverse.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like bing_block_url_remove or when to verify the site first. The description is purely functional with no contextual usage advice.

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