search_pinterest_pins

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states 'Search' implying read-only, but fails to disclose pagination behavior, authentication requirements, or rate limits. The description is too brief to provide meaningful transparency.

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 concise with a single sentence, but it lacks structure and fails to front-load important information. It is not excessively verbose, but could be improved with additional context without losing conciseness.

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 the lack of output schema and annotations, the description is woefully incomplete. It does not explain how to use pagination, what the response format is, or authentication requirements. For a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, this is insufficient.

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?

With only 25% schema description coverage, the description adds minimal value. It mentions 'by keyword' but does not explain 'page_size', 'bookmark', or 'access_token'. The description does not compensate for the poor schema coverage.

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 Pinterest pins by keyword, which is a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'list_pinterest_pins' which may also list pins but with different criteria.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_pinterest_pins'. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage without help.

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