get_public_photo

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the behavior of the `download` parameter (returns a download URL) but does not state whether the operation is read-only, what the default response looks like, or any potential side effects. Since it is a 'get' operation, the risk is low, but the description could add more context about the response content.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. Every word earns its place; no filler or redundancy.

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 simple get-by-ID tool with no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It tells the caller how to get a download URL, which is a key distinction. It could mention the default response (e.g., photo metadata) to be fully complete, but the tool's simplicity keeps the gap small.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explicitly explains the `download` parameter with 'Set download=true to get a download URL'. The `id` parameter is self-explanatory from the tool purpose and name, so no further explanation is needed.

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 'Get a public photo by ID', which is specific with a verb and resource. It differentiates from the sibling 'get_photo' by specifying 'public'. The additional detail about the `download` parameter also clarifies purpose.

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 context is clear: use this for public photos by ID. The instruction 'Set download=true to get a download URL' provides a specific use case. However, it does not explicitly exclude using other tools like 'get_photo' for non-public photos, so it lacks explicit alternatives.

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