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

Since there are no annotations, the description must carry all behavioral load. It successfully highlights key versioning behavior ('latest version unless one is named') and the existence of a secondary feature (listing all versions), which is critical context.

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 brief and to the point, with the core function and the versioning logic delivered immediately. It avoids excessive jargon while providing necessary technical context.

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?

It is moderately complete, defining what the markup is and how versioning works. However, lacking an output schema, the description could be more complete by briefly mentioning the format of the SVG overlay or the contents of the version list.

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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, making semantic clarity vital. The description uses the `version` parameter conceptually ('latest version unless one is named'), adding substantial meaning that the integer type alone cannot convey.

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 identifies the resource (a photo's markup) and the output (SVG overlay, list of versions). It is specific, but doesn't explicitly distinguish it from a general `media_get` sibling tool.

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 explains a crucial behavioral choice: 'latest version unless one is named,' which implies a usage strategy regarding version control. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over a simpler `media_get` or when versioning is necessary.

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