ocr_image

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It discloses local processing and privacy, but omits important behavioral details such as output format, supported image formats beyond mention, error handling, and synchronous vs asynchronous execution.

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 concise with three sentences, front-loading the main purpose. No extraneous information; every sentence adds value.

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?

While the description covers input types and key traits (local, private), it lacks information about the output (e.g., no mention of return value or structure). Given no output schema, this gap reduces completeness.

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?

Both parameters have schema descriptions, and the tool description adds value by providing usage context (e.g., 'Use this after taking a screenshot...') for the 'path' parameter, going 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 clearly states the tool extracts text from an image using local Tesseract.js OCR, specifying both input types (file path or URL). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'browser_ocr'.

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 a specific usage hint ('Use this after taking a screenshot...') but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use, prerequisites, or alternatives beyond one example.

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