Search the web for information. Use when you need to find web pages, articles, or data. Providers: tavily (factual/citations), brave (privacy/operators), kagi (quality/operators), exa (AI-semantic), kagi_enrichment (specialized indexes). Brave/Kagi support query operators like site:, filetype:, lang:, before:, after:.

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), so the description is not required to repeat that. It adds provider-specific details and query operators, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits like rate limits or expected output format. No contradiction with annotations.

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 with one sentence stating purpose and a list of providers. It is front-loaded with the core function, though the provider list could be integrated more smoothly. No wasted words.

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 simplicity of the tool and comprehensive annotations/schema, the description covers the main points. However, it does not mention the structure of search results or pagination behavior (though 'limit' parameter hints), which could be helpful given no output schema.

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 adds value by explaining the differences between providers and mentioning query operators for Brave/Kagi, which enriches the understanding of the 'query' and 'provider' parameters beyond their schema descriptions.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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 provides guidance on provider selection (e.g., factual vs. privacy) and mentions query operators, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.

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