tool_search_by_artist

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the search action, omitting that the operation is read-only, whether authentication is needed, or pagination behavior. The default limit and museum selection are not mentioned in the description, leaving the agent to infer from the schema.

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 sentence of 6 words, which is very concise. However, it is too brief given the tool's complexity (3 parameters, output schema, sibling tools). It lacks front-loaded context about the museum and limit defaults. Conciseness should not sacrifice necessary information; here it borders on under-specification.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description does not explain that the tool defaults to the Met museum and returns up to 8 results. It provides no context about the scope of the search or how it relates to sibling tools. The description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's capabilities and limitations.

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% with all parameters documented. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not clarify the default limit or museum options. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already covers parameter meaning, but the description could have provided rationale or usage hints.

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 for artworks by a specific artist ('Kunstwerke eines bestimmten Kuenstlers suchen'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'search_artworks' (general) or 'search_by_department' by specifying the filtering criterion. The verb and resource are explicit, though the German language may reduce clarity for non-German-speaking agents.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'search_artworks' and 'search_by_period', an explicit statement of when to prefer this tool (e.g., 'Use when the user asks for works by a specific artist') is missing. No exclusions or context are provided.

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