find_images_with_exif_fields

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

No annotations exist, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as how matches are returned, whether it is read-only, or any side effects. The minimal description fails to compensate for missing 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 a single short sentence, which is concise. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, making it slightly under-specified for the tool's complexity.

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 tool has 5 parameters, 2 required, and a likely non-trivial output (though an output schema exists but is unhelpful), the description fails to cover return format, match mode behavior, or filtering nuances. It is incomplete for effective selection and invocation.

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 has 5 parameters with no descriptions (0% schema coverage), and the description only vaguely references 'selected EXIF fields' without explaining 'folder_path', 'match_mode', 'recursive', or 'extensions'. The description adds almost no value beyond parameter names.

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 explicitly states the verb 'find', the resource 'images in one folder', and the filter 'containing selected EXIF fields', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'find_images_with_gps_exif' or batch operations.

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 'find_images_with_gps_exif' or 'batch_strip_exif'. There are no explicit context or exclusion statements.

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