find_image

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: tries Docker Hub, GHCR, Quay.io; explains trial order; and clearly states limitation about GHCR org names. No surprises.

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?

Well-structured with bold sections and bullet points. Slightly long but every sentence adds value. Front-loads purpose and key guidance.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, limitations, and examples comprehensively. No gaps given the context.

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 already describes the 'name' parameter well (100% coverage). The description adds extra value with format advice ('org/repo'), best practices, and concrete examples, exceeding schema info.

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 finds an image by name across multiple registries, with specific verb 'Find' and resource 'image'. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on discovery, not updates or tag listing.

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?

Provides best practices (e.g., use org/repo format, check project website) and explicit limitation about GHCR. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use vs sibling tools, but guidance is still strong.

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