image_search

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, establishing safety. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it searches Docker Hub only (not other registries), returns only public images, and includes the return format. This exceeds the baseline set by 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 concise and well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, a scope clarification with an alternative, and a parameter/return breakdown. Every sentence provides value, with no redundancy.

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 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It documents parameters, return format, and scope constraints. No critical information is missing for an agent to decide when and how to invoke the 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 0%, so the description fully compensates. It explains both parameters: `term` with examples ('nginx', 'python') and `limit` as the maximum result count, noting Docker Hub's default of 25. This adds meaning beyond the bare 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 the tool's purpose: 'Search Docker Hub for public images matching a term.' It specifies the resource (Docker Hub) and action (search), and distinguishes from siblings by noting it searches Docker Hub only and directs to `registry_tags` for tag listing from any OCI registry.

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 explicit usage guidance: it states when to use this tool (searching Docker Hub public images) and when not to, naming `registry_tags` as the alternative for listing tags from any OCI registry. This clearly differentiates from relevant siblings.

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