search_artist_images

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains the behavioral differences based on the 'kind' parameter (provider sets and query expansion). However, it does not disclose any other behavioral traits such as read-only nature, pagination, or rate limits.

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 concise with a few sentences, front-loaded with the purpose. It could be more structured, but it is not overly long and gets to the point.

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 lack of output schema and missing parameter descriptions, the description should be more comprehensive. It only covers the 'kind' parameter and one usage scenario, leaving many parameters and the return format unexplained.

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 only explains the 'kind' parameter in detail; the other 8 parameters (like safeSearch, licensePolicy, maxPerProvider, etc.) are not described at all. This adds minimal value 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?

The description clearly states it is a specialized image search for a musical artist, and explicitly distinguishes this tool from sibling search_images by saying 'Prefer this over search_images when building artist/band content.' It also explains the purpose of the 'kind' parameter with specific provider sets.

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 gives explicit guidance on when to use this tool over search_images for artist/band content. However, it does not mention when not to use it or provide alternatives for other contexts, and lacks details about other sibling tools like search_album_cover.

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