search_image

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden, but it only states 'search' without revealing read-only behavior, result shape, pagination behavior, or Naver-specific quirks. This is insufficient for a tool that returns data.

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 with no filler, repetition, or unnecessary structure. It front-loads the core action and is appropriately concise for the schema-rich context.

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?

Despite complete schema and no output schema, the description does not explain what results look like, how sorting/output count work in practice, or what network/API behavior to expect. The sibling search tools share the same shape, so this lack of contextual detail leaves the tool feeling incomplete.

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% and every parameter (query, sort, start, display) has a clear Korean description. The tool description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema fully documents parameters.

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 action as 'Perform a search on Naver Image' with a specific verb and resource, and the resource 'Image' differentiates it from sibling search_news, search_blog, etc. However, it omits any scope qualifiers (e.g., what is returned, pagination defaults), so it stops short of being fully explicit.

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 guidance is given for when to use this tool over sibling search tools; the description does not mention alternatives or exclusions. The reader must infer usage from the name and siblings list.

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