search_polyhaven_assets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states that the tool 'Returns a list of matching assets with basic information' but does not disclose other behaviors such as rate limits, authentication requirements, or whether the operation is read-only. Minimal behavioral information is given.

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 brief and functional, consisting of two sentences for the overview and a structured list of parameters. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and uses efficient language. However, it could be slightly tighter by integrating the parameter details into a more cohesive format.

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 the low parameter count (2) and absence of annotations and output schema, the description provides adequate but not comprehensive context. It covers the core functionality and parameter types but lacks details on default values (e.g., asset_type defaults to 'all'), the structure of returned data, and potential errors or limitations.

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% description coverage, so the description must add meaning. It explains 'asset_type' with possible values (hdris, textures, models, all) and 'categories' as a comma-separated list. This adds basic semantics beyond the schema, but does not enumerate possible categories or provide format constraints, achieving only moderate value.

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 purpose: 'Search for assets on Polyhaven with optional filtering.' It distinguishes from siblings by referencing Polyhaven, while 'search_sketchfab_models' targets a different source. The verb 'search' combined with 'assets' and 'optional filtering' provides a specific and actionable purpose.

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 explains what the tool does and mentions optional filtering, but it lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'search_sketchfab_models' or 'get_polyhaven_categories.' No explicit context for when-not-to-use or alternatives is provided.

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