search_polyhaven_assets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly conveys a read-only search operation and states that it 'Returns a list of matching assets with basic information', which is useful context. However, it does not mention pagination, result limits, required authentication, or that actual asset files are not downloaded by this tool.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. The parameter list is minimal and useful, and the return statement is a single line. No redundant prose or filler exists.

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 search tool with only two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic call contract. However, 'basic information' is vague about the exact return fields, and it does not tell the agent that valid category values can be obtained from get_polyhaven_categories. These are notable gaps given there is no output schema.

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 must compensate. It does so well by documenting asset_type with its allowed values (hdris, textures, models, all) and categories as an 'optional comma-separated list'. This adds real meaning beyond the bare schema property names and defaults.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search for assets on Polyhaven'. Combined with the asset_type values (hdris, textures, models, all), it clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling search tools like search_sketchfab_models and from download/category tools.

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 the tool should be used when the agent needs to discover Polyhaven assets, and it mentions optional filtering. However, it does not explicitly contrast with siblings such as get_polyhaven_categories or download_polyhaven_asset, nor does it state when not to use this tool.

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