photos_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does volunteer one genuinely useful behavioral trait — results are returned 'newest first' — and flags itself as '(Beta)', but says nothing about result limits, pagination, permission requirements, or what happens when no filters match, and the text is truncated before any of that could appear.

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 text is short and front-loads the resource and ordering, which is good. However, it terminates mid-sentence at 'and/...', so the final clause is unusable and the definition reads as broken rather than deliberately concise.

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?

For a zero-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema search tool, the description needs to explain what comes back and how to bound the result set. Instead it names filters that don't exist in the schema and then cuts off, so an agent cannot tell how to invoke it correctly or what to expect.

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?

The tool declares zero parameters, which would normally be a baseline 4, but the description references filters ('taken between from and to, in one album') that the empty schema does not expose. That mismatch between described inputs and the actual schema is confusing rather than informative, so it falls below the zero-param baseline.

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 — 'Finds photos and videos in Apple Photos' — which is enough to tell it apart from photos_export and photos_list_albums. It also names the filter axes (date range, single album), though the sentence is cut off mid-clause ('and/...'), leaving the full scope unclear.

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 statement of when to use this versus alternatives such as photos_export or photos_list_albums, and no exclusions or prerequisites. The only implicit guidance is that it targets the Apple Photos library, which the agent must infer from the tool name and one phrase.

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