search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses page semantics, per-site limits, rating value mappings, min_score meaning, and that filtering can return fewer results than limit. It does not mention auth, rate limits, or read-only status, but it is still more transparent than most.

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 compact, scannable, and every clause adds a distinct parameter or per-site fact. It front-loads the action and then efficiently enumerates constraints.

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 multi-site complexity and absence of annotations, the description covers the main invocation requirements: per-site ratings, limits, page semantics, and min_score. An output schema exists so return values do not need explanation; the remaining gaps are explicit site parameter values and a concrete query example.

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 is the only source of parameter meaning. It explains query, page, limit caps, rating values per site, and min_score. However, accepted site values are only implied by the list 'e621/rule34/ehentai/pixiv' rather than explicitly tied to the site parameter, and no query example is given.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: searching e621/rule34/ehentai/pixiv. It clearly frames this as a multi-site search tool and distinguishes it from siblings like get_post and download_post by focusing on query, rating, and limit behavior.

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 provides concrete guidance on how to construct searches: native tags or keywords, 1-based page numbering, per-site limit caps, and per-site rating vocabulary. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the usage context is unambiguous.

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