search_posts

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. It mentions support for 'all Gelbooru tag syntax' and lists various operators, which adds context about search capabilities. However, it does not cover important behavioral aspects like rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or response format, leaving gaps in transparency for a search tool.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, starting with the core purpose and immediately diving into key features like tag syntax. Every sentence adds value by explaining capabilities, though it could be slightly more structured by separating syntax examples into bullet points for clarity.

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 complexity of a search tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is partially complete. It covers search syntax and parameters well but lacks information on return values, pagination behavior, or error scenarios. Without annotations or an output schema, these gaps reduce overall completeness for effective agent use.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all 5 parameters thoroughly. The description adds value by explaining the broader context of tag syntax and usage examples, but it does not provide additional semantic details beyond what the schema specifies, such as interactions between parameters or edge cases.

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 specific action ('Search Gelbooru posts') and the resources involved ('by tags, page, limit, or ID'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_tags or search_users. It provides concrete examples of what can be searched, making the purpose unambiguous and specific.

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 implies usage through examples of tag syntax and parameters, suggesting when to use this tool for searching posts versus other tools. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or direct alternatives, such as distinguishing from get_deleted_posts or get_comments for specific post-related queries.

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