buscar_fotos

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds modest value by indicating the photos are 'listas para usar' and providing typical tags, but it does not disclose behavior like filtering semantics, result ordering, or whether an empty etiqueta returns all photos.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The core purpose is stated first, followed by a compact list of typical tags. Every word contributes meaning.

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 tool with one optional parameter and read-only annotations, the description provides sufficient context to understand the basic call: a catalog lookup with typical tag hints. It does not explain the return structure, but the tool's simplicity and the phrase 'con nombre' partially cover what to expect.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented 'etiqueta' parameter. The description lists typical tag values such as boda, xv, and cumpleaños, which gives useful examples for the parameter. However, it never explicitly states that 'etiqueta' is a filter or what an empty value means, so it only partially compensates.

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 states the tool is a catalog of ready-to-use photos for offering options to the user, which clearly identifies a photo-retrieval purpose. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like agregar_fotos_galeria and cambiar_foto_portada by framing this as a read-side catalog, though it does not explicitly use a verb like 'buscar' or contrast with siblings.

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 phrase 'para ofrecerle opciones al usuario' gives a clear usage context: use this tool when presenting selectable photo options to the user. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention sibling tools, but the context is specific enough for a reasonable agent to know when to invoke it.

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