smart-search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: it returns URLs rather than content directly, and requires a separate WebFetch tool to get actual results. This clarifies the tool's role as a search gateway with a two-step process, which is valuable context beyond basic functionality.

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 that each earn their place: the first states the core functionality, the second provides crucial behavioral guidance about the URL return and WebFetch requirement. No wasted words, front-loaded with essential information.

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's moderate complexity (search gateway with 2 parameters), no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description provides adequate but incomplete context. It explains the behavioral workflow well but leaves parameters undocumented and doesn't describe the URL format or any limitations. For a search tool with siblings, more differentiation would be helpful.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for 2 parameters (query and product), the description provides no information about what these parameters mean, their format, or how they affect the search. The description doesn't compensate for the complete lack of parameter documentation in the schema, leaving both parameters semantically undefined.

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 Tencent Cloud product documentation and APIs with a specific verb ('搜索' meaning search) and resource ('腾讯云产品文档和API'). It distinguishes from siblings by specifying the Tencent Cloud focus, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other search tools like ai_search_aliyun_docs or ai_search_web.

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 implied usage context by mentioning it returns URLs that should be accessed with WebFetch tool, suggesting this is a search gateway rather than direct content retrieval. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs. other search tools like ai_search_aliyun_docs or ai_search_api_reference, nor does it provide exclusion criteria.

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