search_images

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses return types (CDN URLs, captions, metadata) and mentions 'fast structured results', but does not cover pagination behavior, required permissions, or error handling.

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 just two sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose, second sentence adds value proposition. Well front-loaded.

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?

No output schema is provided, but the description covers key return elements (CDN URLs, captions, metadata). It lacks explicit mention of pagination or empty result handling, but overall it is reasonably complete for a search tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema; no parameter-specific elaboration is given.

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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'images and visual elements'. It specifies what is returned (CDN URLs, captions, metadata) and adds 'without loading web pages' to differentiate from web scraping. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'get_element' or 'search_collections'.

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 provides context for use cases ('mood boards, design research, and visual inspiration'), implying when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention any alternative tools among the siblings.

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