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

Beyond annotations, it discloses the 150-credit cost, the need to ask for confirmation, that a new picture is added to the gallery, and that setting portrait=true preserves the old portrait in the gallery. It also states the return value: the picture and its web address.

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 front-loaded with the cost and consent requirement, followed by purpose, parameter semantics, side effects, and return value. It is dense and each sentence adds useful information.

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?

Given no output schema and only minimal schema descriptions, the description covers the critical cost, consent, behavior, side effects, and return value. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly with appropriate user confirmation.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It explains description, portrait, and shape well, including the effect of portrait=true and allowed shape values, but it does not explain character_id or how to obtain it.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: it 'makes a new picture of one of the person's characters' in the character's world art style and adds it to the character's gallery. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling image tools such as make_world_picture and get_character_images.

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?

It provides important usage context: the tool costs 150 LoreKeeper credits, so the agent must tell the user and ask first. It also explains when to use description versus leaving it empty. However, it does not explicitly route the agent to alternatives like make_world_picture for world images or find_characters for character IDs.

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