Related Unsplash Collections

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description's 'Read-only' merely restates the annotation and adds no new behavioral context such as rate limits, pagination, or result volatility. It does not contradict annotations.

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 very short and front-loaded with the primary action and target. However, 'Read-only.' is entirely redundant with the annotation, making it a small amount of non-essential information in an otherwise tight description.

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 single-parameter, read-only listing tool, the description is complete enough. The purpose is clear, the parameter is fully documented in the schema, and no output schema is needed for an agent to understand that the result will be a list of collections.

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% and the only parameter, id, is already described as 'The Unsplash collection ID.' The description's phrase 'given collection' only indirectly maps to the parameter and does not provide additional semantic value beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List collections related to a given collection.' It clearly identifies the action and target object, and the phrase 'related to a given collection' distinguishes it from sibling tools like unsplash_list_collections or unsplash_get_collection.

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 usage context is implied: use this when you already have a collection ID and want related collections. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when-not to use this tool, leaving some routing burden on the agent.

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