nido_image

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It lists action names but does not disclose side effects such as whether pull downloads, remove/cache_remove/cache_prune delete data, whether operations are reversible, what permissions are needed, or what the tool returns.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose and action set, followed by a concrete resource-preference tip. The action enumeration is somewhat redundant with the schema enum but still useful for quick scanning.

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?

This is a multi-action mutation-capable tool with no annotations and no output schema, yet the description omits action-specific behavior, side effects, prerequisites, return values, and parameter mapping. It gives resource guidance but not enough context to invoke complex actions safely.

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 coverage is moderate at 67%, and the schema already describes the image and unused_only parameters. The description repeats the action enum values but adds no action-specific parameter guidance, such as when image is required or that unused_only applies only to cache_prune.

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 plus resource ('Manage the image catalog and cache') and enumerates all supported actions. The image-domain focus clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools such as nido_vm, nido_template, and nido_system.

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?

Explicitly recommends using resources like nido://catalog/images, nido://image/{tag}, and nido://storage/cache for inspection to reduce token usage. It does not explain when each individual action is appropriate or when mutations must be done through the tool versus resources.

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