search_photos

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only lists search criteria. It does not state whether filters combine with AND/OR, what the default limit of 100 means, whether the operation is read-only, or what constitutes a match.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the verb, resource, and filtering dimensions efficiently, making every word meaningful.

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 tool is relatively simple and has an output schema, so return-value documentation is unnecessary. However, the lack of any usage guidance, sibling differentiation, or behavioral detail means the description is only minimally complete for an agent deciding between this and related Lightroom tools.

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?

Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description compensates by mapping each criterion to its parameter: query=text, rating=star rating, flag=pick flag, and color_label=color label. It omits the 'limit' parameter, but the schema default partially covers that; it does not provide value formats or allowed enums.

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 clear verb ('Search'), a specific resource ('photos in Lightroom Classic'), and enumerates the search dimensions (text, star rating, pick flag, color label). It does not, however, differentiate this tool from the sibling 'lightroom_search_photos' or clarify its relationship to 'get_selected_photos' / 'get_photo_metadata'.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternative siblings. It does not mention that 'get_photo_metadata' is better for inspecting a specific photo, nor does it state any prerequisites or exclusions. The intended usage is only implied by the word 'Search'.

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