Web Research

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'native web search' and 'citeable sources' but does not disclose whether the tool performs live web access, how sources are selected, whether results are cached, or any rate limits or failure modes. For a research tool, this is a significant gap.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose and outcome without waste. It earns its place, though it could add a brief usage note without becoming bloated.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, the description is too thin. An agent cannot tell how to interpret the response, what 'citeable sources' means structurally, or how freshness and max_sources affect behavior. The sibling web_search also creates a routing ambiguity that is not resolved.

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 for the three parameters. It does not explain the meaning of 'freshness' or 'max_sources', nor how they affect the research output. The query parameter is obvious from the description, but the other two are left entirely to the schema's enum and default values.

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 states a specific verb ('research'), a resource ('DeepSeek native web search'), and an outcome ('return citeable sources'). It is clear enough to distinguish from a generic search tool, though it does not explicitly name the sibling web_search or explain how it differs.

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 implies usage for research questions requiring citeable sources, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus web_search, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives. The context signal of a sibling tool named web_search makes this gap noticeable.

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