Get image

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description. The description adds only the returned payload scope (label and OS details); it says nothing about behavior on an unknown UUID or lookup failure, so added value is modest.

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?

A single sentence with the resource, key, and returned fields front-loaded in that order. No filler, no redundancy, nothing that could be cut without losing 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?

For a one-parameter read-only getter with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the definition covers purpose, key provenance, and return scope adequately. The only omission is failure behavior for a nonexistent UUID, which is a minor gap at this complexity level.

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% and the single parameter already documents that it is an image UUID sourced from list_images. The description restates that same provenance rather than adding new meaning, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (get one OS image) plus the lookup key (UUID) and the returned content (label and OS details). The parenthetical '(from list_images)' implicitly distinguishes it from get_image_by_label, but the contrast is never made explicit, so an agent must infer which sibling to pick.

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 '(from list_images)' pointer tells the agent where to source the identifier, which is useful prerequisite guidance. However, there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over get_image_by_label or list_images, and no exclusions are given; usage is only implied by the UUID phrasing.

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