gimp_pdb_search

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden. It does state the core search behavior: matching words in procedure names. However, it does not disclose matching semantics such as case sensitivity, multi-word combination behavior, or what happens with an empty query.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The examples ('image scale', 'layer text', 'file png') make the intended usage immediately clear without adding unnecessary length.

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?

The description covers the main action and query semantics, and an output schema exists, so return structure does not need explanation. However, it omits guidance on default behavior, especially when no query is provided, and does not explain the limit parameter, leaving minor but real gaps 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 has 0% parameter description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds useful semantics for 'query' with the phrase 'words in the procedure name' and examples, but it says nothing about the 'limit' parameter, leaving its meaning and effect unspecified.

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 names a concrete verb and resource: 'Search GIMP's Procedure Database' and narrows the scope to 'words in the procedure name' with illustrative examples. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like gimp_pdb_describe, gimp_pdb_call, and gimp_filter_search.

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 this tool is for discovering PDB procedures by name, but it does not explicitly say when to use it versus alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or alternative tool names are given, leaving some routing up to the agent's inference.

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