search_all_images

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses an important behavioral trait: unconfigured or rate-limited providers are skipped with a note instead of failing the whole call. This adds partial-failure context, but it doesn't mention other behaviors like authentication, pagination, or all-providers-fail scenarios.

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 sentence that front-loads the main action and appends a key edge-case behavior. There is no redundant text, and every word earns its place.

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 tool's low complexity and presence of an output schema, the description covers the core scope (all configured providers), concurrency, and partial failure. It doesn't explain prerequisites or all failure modes, but it is adequate for a straightforward 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 coverage is 0% and the description does not mention query, per_page, or orientation. The parameters are discoverable by name/type/defaults, but the description adds no meaning and fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions. Thus it provides minimal value beyond the raw 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 a specific action: 'Search every configured provider' and adds 'concurrently', which is a distinguishing factor from sibling tools like search_stock_images that likely target a single provider. The verb and resource are explicit.

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 broad cross-provider searches but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., search_stock_images) or provide exclusions. It lacks direct 'use when' or 'instead of' guidance, but the scope is inferable.

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