Search Images by Clade

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose a non-obvious trait: results are 'roughly sorted by their subject matter's proximity to the clade root node.' It says nothing about result size, permissions, or rate limits, so it adds one useful behavioral detail but leaves other traits undeclared.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, followed by usage examples and the sorting note. Every sentence contributes information; there is no repetition of the name or title as filler.

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 two-parameter read tool with a fully described schema and no output schema, the description covers what is returned (silhouette images), the scope of the search, and ordering. It omits pagination behavior on the return side, but the schema's page parameter partially covers that.

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 100% — both clade_uuid and page are fully documented, including the clade UUID example. The description reinforces that clade_uuid denotes a root node whose descendants are included, but adds no format, constraint, or pagination semantics beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List silhouette images') plus the scope ('within a clade (a node and all its descendants)'). The parenthetical definition of clade effectively separates it from search_images_by_node, but the sibling is never named, so the agent must infer the contrast.

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?

Gives clear context for when it applies — 'useful for ancestral nodes — for example, getting all images of mammals, birds, or insects' — which tells the agent this is for higher-level taxonomic rollups. It stops short of an explicit exclusion or a named alternative (e.g. use search_images_by_node for a single node).

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