get_top_image

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions 'current output' and 'viewed directly', but does not specify if the operation is destructive, what the output format is (e.g., base64, file path), or how errors are handled. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation-supported safety profile.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the primary action and object, then adds a parenthetical for the optional parameter. It is efficient with no superfluous words.

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?

The description omits the output format or how the image is returned (e.g., URL, binary data). With no output schema, this is a critical gap for an agent to handle the result. It also does not mention error conditions (e.g., invalid nodePath).

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%; both parameters have detailed descriptions (nodePath with example, maxSize with unit and behavior). The tool-level description adds only a summary of maxSize's optional downscaling, providing no new semantics beyond the 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 'Capture the current output of a TOP node as an image so it can be viewed directly', using a specific verb and resource. It clearly differentiates from siblings like get_td_nodes (which list nodes) by specifying the action of capturing an image.

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 clear context: use when you want to view a TOP node's output as an image, with optional downscaling via maxSize. While it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, the sibling set lacks an alternative for image capture, so the guidance is sufficient.

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