xmlstock_images

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently explains the paid nature of requests and the meaning of 'truncated: true' when results end earlier than requested. It also lists the return fields, adding valuable context beyond a generic search description.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. It communicates cost, return shape, and pagination semantics efficiently.

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?

Despite lacking annotations and an output schema, the description compensates by explaining the return structure and truncated flag. The schema covers parameters thoroughly. Missing usage guidance and authentication notes, but for a search tool with strong schema support, this is nearly complete.

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 coverage is 71%, with descriptions for most parameters. The description itself does not add parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides, such as depth pagination and safeSearch behavior. Since the schema handles parameter semantics well, a baseline of 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Поиск по картинкам Google через XMLStock' (search Google Images via XMLStock). It specifies the resource (Google Images), the verb (search), and distinguishes from siblings like xmlstock_serp or xmlstock_news by focusing specifically on images.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives. The paid-per-request warning implies cost-conscious use, but the description does not mention exclusions or alternative tools. The context is clear for an image-specific search, but there is no active comparison.

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