search_gallery

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

Since there are no annotations, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It successfully explains the security implications of the 'mine' flag, stating it requires an owner token for scoping.

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 extremely concise, using two sentences to define the purpose and list all primary operational modes (filters and 'mine' mode) without any unnecessary fluff.

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?

The description effectively complements the 100% schema coverage by explaining the functional implications of 'mine.' It is highly complete for a search utility, needing no explanation of return formats.

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?

Given the 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds semantic value by linking the 'mine' parameter to the security requirement of the 'owner token,' providing context the schema descriptions lack.

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 identifies the action ('Search'), the resource ('BrewPage public gallery'), and differentiates it functionally from the general resource management tools listed in the sibling tools.

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?

It identifies the nature of the inputs ('Optional filters: text query, pagination, sort') and highlights specific conditional usage for the 'mine' filter. It is clear on scope, though it lacks a specific 'use this vs get_page' comparison.

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