web_search_fast

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses low reasoning intensity, expected 1-2 search rounds, and concise answer style, offering useful insight into trade-offs. It doesn't discuss error behavior or exact output structure, but the disclosed trade-offs are sufficient for a fast search tool.

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 two sentences long, front-loads the purpose, and packs relevant details about usage and behavioral trade-offs without extraneous 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?

For a simple one-parameter search tool with no output schema or annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, usage, and behavior. The phrase '直接给出简洁答案' (directly gives a concise answer) hints at the response format, making it complete enough for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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% for the single 'query' parameter, with a description and example provided. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 this is a web search tool with a fast mode, distinguishing it from siblings through speed and low reasoning intensity. The verb '联网搜索' (web search) and modifier '快速模式' (fast mode) make the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly states it is suitable for time-sensitive queries that don't require deep verification, which provides a clear 'when to use'. This also implies not using it for deep verification, effectively giving a when-not via context.

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