search_gifs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses search behavior and parameter constraints but does not mention side effects (none expected), authentication requirements, or pagination details beyond offset. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 clear 'Args' list format, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence provides value without redundancy, and the structure is easy to parse.

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?

With an output schema present, return value description is unnecessary. The description covers all 5 parameters exhaustively. It lacks guidance on error handling or result format, but given the simple search nature and output schema, it 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 description adds significant meaning beyond the schema, which has 0% coverage. It explains each parameter: query as a search term, limit with max 50, offset for pagination, rating filter with allowed values, and language code. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 for GIFs on Giphy' with a specific verb and resource, and the tool name 'search_gifs' aligns perfectly. The sibling tools (get_gif_by_id, get_random_gif, get_trending_gifs, translate) are distinct, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 details parameters with defaults and limits (e.g., limit max 50, rating options), which guides usage. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings, though the context implies searching is for finding specific GIFs by query.

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