Image Search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral context. It usefully discloses that the tool performs a web search and returns real URLs, not AI-generated images, and that context_size controls depth. It does not mention rate limits, pagination, or other operational details, but for a read-only search tool this is sufficient disclosure.

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 compact, with the main purpose in the first sentence and two bullet points that add practical details. No filler or repetition, and information is front-loaded for quick scanning.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description responsibly explains what the tool returns (image URLs, titles, source pages). It also gives a key behavioral detail (real images, not AI-generated). It does not discuss error cases or limitations, but for a simple search tool with only three parameters, the description is sufficiently complete.

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 input schema already has 100% parameter description coverage, including 'Search depth' for context_size. The description's note about contextSize controlling search depth paraphrases the schema without adding new meaning. It does not clarify the parameter list beyond what is already structured.

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 'Search the web for images' with a specific verb and resource. It also lists return types (image URLs, titles, source pages), and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling web_search by focusing on images rather than general web results.

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 clearly implies a use case (searching for images, not text) and notes that it returns real image URLs rather than AI-generated ones. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over web_search or any exclusions, so it stops short of full usage guidance.

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