Create Image

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false (write operation) and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns the created object on success (HTTP 201). However, it does not disclose error handling, idempotency, or side effects beyond what annotations provide.

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 four sentences, front-loads the main action, and includes useful endpoint/API reference. It is efficient but includes a minor typo ('Photos') and could be slightly more 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 simple create tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately states the purpose and required fields. However, it omits details about error responses, the optional upload_uuid alternative, and specific format requirements for the image object.

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 well-documented. The description only repeats required fields (project_id, image_name, image) and the endpoint, adding no new semantics 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 verb (upload/add), resource (Image), and context (Project's Photo Album). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'create_image_category' by specifying 'Upload and add a new Image to a Project's Photo Album'.

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 says 'Use this to create a new Photos in Procore' but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention alternatives like 'create_image_category' or 'update_image'. Implied usage but lacks direct exclusions.

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