search_gallery

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

Annotations already declare 'readOnlyHint: true'. The description adds value by stating that results include image URLs and suggesting to render them as markdown images for visual browsing. This provides useful behavioral context beyond the read-only nature.

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, each earning its place. First sentence states the tool's function and key feature (1300+ prompts, previews). Second sentence provides usage guidance and display instruction. No wasted words.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description appropriately explains that results include image URLs and suggests display format. It mentions the size of the gallery (1300+). However, it could further detail the response structure (e.g., fields like prompt text, category) or pagination behavior, but overall it is fairly complete for a search tool.

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 schema already documents all parameters. The description adds limited extra value: examples for 'query' (e.g., 'cyberpunk') and noting that leaving it empty browses by category. This is helpful but not essential beyond the schema.

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 searches a curated gallery of AI image prompts, including preview images. It distinguishes from siblings like 'generate_image' by specifying use cases: inspiration, exploring styles, or when user says 'generate an image' without a specific idea.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: when users need inspiration, want to explore styles, or have a vague request. It does not mention when not to use, but the context and sibling names imply alternatives like 'generate_image' for direct creation.

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