search_by_image

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full transparency burden. It discloses dual-platform search and AI analysis, but lacks details on authentication requirements, error handling, rate limits, or what happens when the image is invalid. It adds moderate behavioral context beyond the schema.

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?

Single sentence packs key information but uses Chinese with parentheticals. It is front-loaded and efficient, though structure could be improved for machine parsing.

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 exists, so description should explain return value structure. It mentions '相似产品参考图' but not format or fields. For a tool with 3 parameters, the description is adequate but lacks return specification.

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 coverage is 100% for 3 parameters. The description does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides for image_path, max_results, and enable_ai_analysis. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as schema already documents parameters adequately.

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's function: uploading a product image to search for similar reference images across Google and Pinterest, with AI visual analysis and quality scoring. It distinguishes clearly from sibling tools like google_search or fetch_url, which are text-based URL fetch tools.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies usage for image-based product search but does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or when to choose a sibling tool instead.

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