scrape_image_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It doesn't disclose that this is a mutating operation requiring authentication, what happens to an existing image, whether it overwrites, or any rate limitations. The only behavioral hint is the POST endpoint, which is minimal.

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 bloated with a long keyword dump that provides no semantic value. The useful content (endpoint and recipe) is buried but at least front-loaded; the keyword list dominates and crowds out substantive description.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is largely inadequate. It doesn't cover auth requirements, side effects, result format, or how the URL/body relates to image scraping.

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 0%, and the description adds no meaning for the parameters. The nested ScrapeRecipe object (url, includeTags, includeCategories) and the required 'slug' path parameter are not explained at all in the description, leaving the agent to infer parameter roles purely from the JSON schema.

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 states a verb+resource ('Create image', 'Scrape Image Url') and gives the endpoint, so the purpose is identifiable. However, the phrasing is muddled — 'scrape' implies extraction from a URL, while 'create image' implies image creation, and the schema's ScrapeRecipe shows it actually scrapes recipe data from a URL and attaches/creates an image for a recipe. It doesn't clearly distinguish itself from siblings like update_recipe_image or create_recipe_from_html_or_json.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The keyword list contains generic terms but no conditions for selecting this tool over siblings. An agent is left to infer the recipe-image-scraping use case from the endpoint path alone.

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