sd_import_bitmap

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

The description adds the optional instantiation behavior beyond the annotations, but it does not disclose side effects such as modifying the specified package, creating nodes, or implications of embed methods. Annotations are not contradicted, but the description carries minimal behavioral context.

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 focused sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded and every word adds value, making it highly concise.

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 tool with 6 parameters, nested object schemas, and no parameter descriptions, this description is insufficient. It does not explain the meaning of package/graph references or embed_method options, leaving the agent without enough context to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, and the description does not explain any of the 6 parameters. It only implies the file_path and identifier via 'local bitmap resource', but leaves embed_method, graph, package, and position semantics undefined.

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 uses a specific verb 'Import' and clearly identifies the resource as 'one existing local bitmap resource' with optional 'instantiate' action. This distinguishes it from sibling tools, none of which mention import or bitmap resources.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or when another sibling tool would be more appropriate.

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