smart-search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns URLs rather than direct content and requires WebFetch for actual results, which is valuable behavioral context. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, error conditions, or what happens with the optional 'product' parameter.

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 extremely concise with just two sentences, both carrying essential information. The first establishes purpose, the second provides critical behavioral guidance. No wasted words, and the important WebFetch requirement is front-loaded with the 【重要】marker.

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 search tool with 2 parameters (one undocumented), no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides adequate basic purpose and a crucial behavioral note about URL returns. However, it lacks details about parameter usage, result format expectations, and doesn't fully compensate for the missing structured documentation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'query' implicitly through the search context but doesn't explain either parameter's purpose, format, or constraints. The optional 'product' parameter is completely undocumented in both schema and description, leaving significant gaps.

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 Alibaba Cloud documentation and APIs ('搜索阿里云产品文档和API'), providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying the Alibaba Cloud domain, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other search tools like 'ai_search_tencent_docs' or 'ai_search_docs'.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: for searching Alibaba Cloud documentation. It includes an important note about requiring WebFetch to access results, which is helpful guidance. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternatives among the many sibling search tools.

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