get_photo

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It informs the agent of the base64 return format and the user consent prompt, which are important behavioral traits. It does not mention error cases or side effects, but for a retrieval tool, this is reasonably transparent.

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 three concise sentences, each carrying essential information: the action, the return format, and the consent requirement. There is no fluff or redundancy, making it highly effective.

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 simple retrieval tool with full schema coverage, the description adequately covers the key behavioral notes (base64 format and consent). It does not explicitly mention conditional requirements like when document_id is needed, but the schema covers that, making the description complete enough.

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%, so each parameter is already documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as specifics about the type or purpose fields, so the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states 'Retrieve a stored photo' with a specific verb and resource, making the tool's function unambiguous. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like get_document or get_passport, so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_passport or get_document. The consent note implies a usage context but does not offer explicit exclusions or comparison with other retrieval tools.

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