search_drawing_assets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only mentions 'searches' and the library. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, any pagination behavior, or other behavioral traits. Minimal transparency beyond purpose.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with purpose. However, it is too brief to cover needed details, sacrificing completeness for brevity.

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 7 undocumented parameters and no behavioral details, the description is incomplete. While an output schema exists, the description fails to provide necessary context for effective tool use.

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 0% for 7 parameters (limit, query, offset, category, max_depth_mm, max_width_mm, max_height_mm). The description adds no parameter information, failing to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation. This is a severe gap.

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 tool searches a specific resource: the 'controlled architectural drawing-asset library'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_diagram_assets or search_ikea_furniture, but it lacks a verb beyond 'Searches' and does not specify what is returned.

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 implies usage by stating 'only the controlled architectural drawing-asset library', which suggests it is for that specific library and not for others. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternative tools, leaving the agent to infer from sibling names.

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