Search Images

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the behavioral detail that matching is against alt text, which is useful context. However, it does not disclose any edge behaviors like case sensitivity, wildcard matching, or what happens when alt text is missing—minor given 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?

A single sentence that states the operation and its key constraint with zero filler. The most important qualifier ('by alt text content') is front-loaded, so an agent scanning the description immediately knows the tool's scope.

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 read-only search tool, the description plus fully documented schema and safety annotations cover the essentials: what it searches, the filter parameters, and the safe read-only behavior. It does not describe return format, but no output schema exists and search tools are common enough that this is not a critical gap.

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%, so the schema already documents query, lang, and limit. The description essentially restates the query field's purpose ('alt text content') without adding extra semantics such as default ordering or how lang filtering interacts with alt text. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('search') with a clear resource ('images') and a defining qualifier ('by alt text content'). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_images (which would list without searching) and get_image (which fetches a single image), so an agent can tell them apart without inspecting schemas.

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 when to use the tool—when the agent needs to find images by alt text—but provides no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which sibling to prefer (e.g., list_images vs search_images). Usage is inferable but not stated.

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