check_image_update

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

No annotations exist, so description must carry the burden. It implies a read operation via 'check', but fails to disclose important traits like authentication needs, error handling, or whether the operation is safe (non-destructive).

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 concise sentence with no wasted words. While efficient, it may be too brief for adequate understanding, slightly less than ideal for completeness.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and lack of output schema, the description leaves gaps: no mention of return type, behavior when image not found, or differentiation from similar tools. Insufficient for an agent to use correctly without additional context.

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 0%, yet the description only hints at the 'reference' parameter indirectly. It does not explain 'reference' (e.g., image ID, name, tag?) and omits 'env_id' and 'agent_token' entirely, providing minimal added meaning.

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?

Clearly states the action (check) and resource (image update) and specifies 'by reference'. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tool 'check_all_image_updates', missing a chance to clarify scope.

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'check_all_image_updates'. The description is purely declarative without usage context.

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