search_polyhaven_assets

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 only states that the tool searches and can filter; it does not mention result format, network access, pagination, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an unannotated tool.

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 with no redundant information. It puts the primary action and object first, making it easy to scan, and there is no irrelevant filler.

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?

This is a search tool with no output schema and no annotations, so the description should explain what the agent can expect back. It does not mention return values, valid categories, or the need to consult get_polyhaven_categories for category values, leaving the invocation context incomplete.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only the generic notion of 'optional filtering' and does not enhance the parameter meanings already present in the schema, which accurately documents asset_type and categories at a basic level.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Search for assets on PolyHaven'. It conveys the tool's core function and is distinguishable from siblings like download_polyhaven_asset and get_polyhaven_status. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from search_sketchfab_models or name the filtering dimensions, leaving slight room for ambiguity.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of prerequisites or exclusions. The phrase 'with optional filtering' is the only context, which is too vague to help an agent decide between this and related search or status tools.

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