download_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and covers the key runtime facts: the 50-file attempt cap, whole-gallery skip, timeout scope, return fields, and success=false on partial completion while retaining successful files. It does not mention file-location/overwrite behavior or authentication side effects, so it is not a 5.

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 short sentences front-load the operation and cap, then give the alternative, return shape, and failure semantics. Every sentence carries unique information and there is no 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?

The high-level behavior and edge cases are well covered, and an output schema exists so return values need not be restated. However, with 7 parameters and zero schema descriptions, the lack of guidance on query/site formatting, limit semantics, subdir, rating, and min_score leaves meaningful gaps for correct invocation.

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%, and the description only adds meaning for timeout (covering search and download) and loosely implies a 50-file ceiling. Required site/query plus rating, subdir, limit, and min_score are left unexplained, so the agent must guess their formats or allowed values.

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 opening phrase '搜索并批量下载' names a specific action and resource, and the 50-file cap gives clear scope. It explicitly contrasts with 'download_post' for over-limit galleries, so an agent can distinguish it from its siblings without opening 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?

It states that over-limit galleries are skipped and should be downloaded individually via download_post, which is an explicit alternative for a concrete condition. It does not discuss when to prefer plain search or download_url, but the batch-search-and-download intent is clear enough.

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