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

The description states that the tool returns ready-made URLs, which is a behavioral detail. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden; it implies a read-only search operation without explicitly stating side effects, which is acceptable for this context.

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, concise sentence that communicates the core functionality without unnecessary detail. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 search tool with one parameter, the description is complete. It defines the search targets and output behavior (URLs), so an agent has enough context to use it correctly without additional information.

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?

The only parameter 'query' is fully described in the schema with examples ('gradient', 'laptop', 'wald') and the description clarifies it is used for searching in title, filename, or album. This adds meaning beyond the schema's basic type definition.

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 that the tool searches the media library for images by a keyword in title, filename, or album, and returns ready-made URLs. This is a specific verb-resource pair that distinguishes it from list_images and other list tools.

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?

It explicitly describes the search scope (title, filename, album), which tells the agent when to use this tool. It does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the guidance is clear enough for typical search scenarios.

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