search_behance_projects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It lists return fields but omits important traits such as rate limits, pagination behavior, default sorting, case sensitivity, or maximum result count beyond the maxItems parameter. This leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to infer safe and correct usage.

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 efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and output. No redundant or unnecessary information is present.

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 absence of an output schema, the description helpfully enumerates return fields. However, it lacks details on pagination, sorting, error handling, and behavioral context (e.g., default limits, rate limiting). With only two parameters and full schema coverage, the description is partially complete but inadequate for a search tool in a production setting.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% with both parameters having descriptions. The tool description does not add any extra semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 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 the verb ('Search'), resource ('projects on Behance'), and mechanism ('by keyword'). It also lists specific return fields, effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools that target jobs, profiles, or specific project details.

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 keyword-based project searches but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like get_behance_project_details (for a specific project) or search_behance_images. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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