analyze_image

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It discloses anti-hallucination safeguards, a confidence flag ("存疑"), mandatory bbox behavior, and temperature's effect on hallucination. Rich behavioral disclosure beyond basic operation.

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?

Well-structured with Args/Returns sections, but slightly verbose with the mode definitions. Still, every line adds value, so minor deduction only for length.

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?

All parameters, return format, and behavioral traits are covered, including the custom flag. The description is self-contained for a 4-param tool with no schema annotations.

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 has zero descriptions; the description fully compensates by defining image_source as path/URL, enumerating mode values with their outputs, and explaining prompt/temperature semantics beyond defaults.

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?

Starts with a clear verb+object ('Analyze an image') and immediately differentiates from siblings by explicitly pointing to ocr_extract for OCR and describing distinct modes (general, ui_screenshot, ocr, detect). This leaves no ambiguity about the tool's 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?

Includes a mode list that explains which analysis to run, explicitly defers OCR to the dedicated ocr_extract tool, and notes mandatory bbox for detect mode. This gives the agent clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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