pinterest_related_pins

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 disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the core function and does not mention pagination (bookmark), result limits, media filtering, or authentication needs, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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 is front-loaded with the verb 'Find' and contains no filler. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

With four parameters (including pagination and filtering) and no output schema or annotations, the description is too minimal to be complete. It does not hint at the bookmark for pagination or mediaType filtering, leaving the agent without crucial usage context.

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 low (25%), with only mediaType having a description. The description adds no detail about limit or bookmark and only implicitly references pinId. It fails to compensate for the sparse schema, leaving parameter semantics under-specified.

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 function with a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('pins related to a given pin id'), including a parenthetical clarifying visual/contextual similarity. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pinterest_search or pinterest_get_pin.

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 clear context: use this when you have a pin ID and want related pins. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the use case is unambiguous, so it meets the 'clear context, no exclusions' bar.

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