Search container images

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior: case-insensitive substring matching, the upstream data source (public home-ops clusters), the ranked-by-usage result ordering, and what each result row contains, which is more than the annotations convey.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, then the matching semantics and return shape. Nothing is padded and no sentence restates the tool name.

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, the description needn't explain return values, yet it does so briefly and accurately. For a three-parameter read-only search it covers everything an agent needs to invoke it; only sibling routing is absent.

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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented, giving a baseline of 3. The description only adds the case-insensitivity of the substring match and the fact that results are ranked by usage count, which is marginal value beyond the schema.

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 names a specific verb (Search) and a precise resource (container image repositories on kubesearch.dev), plus the matching rule (case-insensitive substring on repository). It clearly reads as a distinct resource domain from the sibling repo_* and search_releases tools, though it never names an alternative to route against.

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?

Usage is implied by "used across public home-ops clusters" and the note that it is equivalent to the kubesearch.dev /image search. However, there is no explicit when-to-use / when-not guidance and no mention of how this differs from search_releases or repo_grep_all for an agent choosing between them.

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