iiif-search

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention what happens on error, if results are paginated, or the format of the output (beyond the optional structured parameter).

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 sentence, very concise and devoid of fluff. However, it sacrifices informativeness for brevity.

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 IIIF and the lack of output schema and annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not explain return values, error handling, or how to obtain the searchServiceUrl.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states 'Search IIIF content using Content Search API', which clearly identifies the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like iiif-manifest or iiif-collection by implying search functionality, but does not explicitly differentiate.

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?

No guidelines are provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or comparisons to sibling tools.

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