Get popular galleries

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

The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the read-only/idempotent annotations by explaining that the selected site controls both the request and the base URL for relative gallery links. This is important for correctly interpreting returned URLs and is not derivable from the annotations or schema.

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 primary purpose is stated first, the site-dependent URL behavior second, and the sibling routing last. Every sentence 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?

For a simple read-only tool with one optional parameter, a full enum, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the essential operational nuance (site selection affecting URLs) and gives sufficient guidance for correct invocation.

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?

The schema already documents the 'site' parameter fully with an enum and default. The description adds complementary meaning by explaining why the parameter matters: it controls both the request target and the base URL used for relative gallery links.

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 identifies the action ('List'), the resource ('current popular galleries'), and the two possible target sites. It distinguishes itself from eh_search_galleries by noting this returns the site's popular ranking rather than query-filtered results.

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 an alternative: 'Use eh_search_galleries when query filters are needed instead of the site's popular ranking.' This gives the agent a clear decision rule for choosing between this tool and its closest sibling.

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