Search Google Photos

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds no behavioral traits beyond 'using filters', which is already implied by the schema. It does not mention pagination, result limits, or any side effects, so minimal additional value.

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 that is concise. It is not verbose, but it could include more context without being wasteful. Still, it is efficient and earns a 4.

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 6 optional parameters and existence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate but does not summarize the filter capabilities (date, album, categories). It is complete enough for a basic tool, but could be more informative.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description adds no semantic value beyond the generic 'using filters', so it meets the baseline of 3 without exceeding it.

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 verb 'search', the resource 'photos in Google Photos', and the mechanism 'using filters'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_album_photos' (which lists without filters) and 'photos_smart_search' (likely advanced), but does not explicitly name them, so slightly less than a 5.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. It does not mention that for simple album listing, 'list_album_photos' is more appropriate, or that 'photos_smart_search' offers advanced options. No exclusions or context are provided.

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