Open Pinterest Visual Search

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds valuable context: it uses a connected local Chrome session, extracts only visible candidates, and addresses the occasional login wall with a fallback action. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise sentences: the first states the primary function, and the second provides a critical usage note. No extraneous content, and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

The description covers the login wall scenario but lacks details on extraction behavior (e.g., scrolling, handling of dynamic content) and the format of returned candidates. With no output schema, these gaps reduce completeness for an agent expecting clear expectations.

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%, and the description does not explain the parameters 'query' or 'limit' beyond their names. It fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions, leaving the agent without guidance on expected input format or constraints.

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 it opens Pinterest search results and extracts visible image candidates, using specific verbs like 'open' and 'extract'. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying Pinterest, as opposed to other platforms like Google Maps or Instagram.

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 provides guidance on when to use an alternative tool: if a login wall appears, call extract_manual_page_candidates. However, it does not explicitly compare to other sibling tools or state when to prefer this over open_url_and_extract_images.

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