agy_visual_doctor

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It mentions 'non-secret' to indicate that secrets are not exposed, but it does not explain side effects, execution context, dependencies, or what evidence is returned, leaving significant behavioral ambiguity.

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 that leads with the verb 'Report' and packs the core purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter tool.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description needs to explain what the tool returns or how it behaves. It only says 'evidence' is reported, but not the format, structure, or examples of that evidence, leaving the context incomplete for an AI agent.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema description coverage is 100%, so no parameter explanation is needed. The baseline score of 4 applies because there are no parameters to document.

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 the verb 'Report' and names the subject 'agy/npx runtime presence and non-secret identity evidence', which gives a general sense of a diagnostic check. However, the phrase 'non-secret identity evidence' is vague and does not clearly define the exact resource or outcome, making the purpose only partially clear.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tool describe_image_gemini. The description only states what it does, not under what circumstances it should be chosen or excluded.

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