Search favorites

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint). The description adds important behavioral context: the tool operates on the authenticated user's favorites, requires authentication, and supports cursor-based pagination (next/prev/seek). This goes beyond the 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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the verb and resource ('Search the authenticated user's...favorites'). Every element (user scope, sites, query, category, cursor) earns its place with 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?

Given rich annotations and an output schema (not shown), the description covers the essential aspects: user scope, sites, and filtering criteria. It could mention that results are paginated or explain the category values, but the existing content is sufficient for a search tool with cursor support.

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 carries the full burden. It explains that query, category, and cursor (covering next/prev/seek) are the main inputs. While it does not detail every parameter (e.g., site, individual cursor fields), it gives sufficient high-level meaning to guide parameter usage.

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 searches the authenticated user's favorites, specifies the sites (E-Hentai or ExHentai), and lists filtering criteria (query, category, cursor). This distinguishes it from siblings like eh_search_galleries (which searches all galleries) and eh_get_favorite_categories (which lists categories).

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: this tool is for searching only the authenticated user's favorites, not all galleries. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the scope is well-defined enough for an agent to infer when it is appropriate.

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