create_ortb_native_image_asset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Create a new image asset' without disclosing any behavioral traits such as required permissions, whether existing assets can be overwritten, what happens on failure, or what the response contains. For a mutation tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap.

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 that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It is appropriately sized for a simple create tool and contains no unnecessary words.

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?

The tool has no output schema, no annotations, and six parameters. The description fails to mention what the tool returns (e.g., the created asset ID), any prerequisites (e.g., the template must exist), or how the parameters semantically relate to an image asset. This is incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 the schema already documents all six parameters. The description adds little meaning beyond confirming template_id is the ORTB native template ID. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Create'), the resource ('image asset'), and the context ('for an ORTB native template'). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like create_ortb_native_title_asset and create_ortb_native_data_asset by specifying 'image'.

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 implies usage: create a new image asset for a template. It doesn't explicitly mention when to use this versus update/delete/list operations, nor does it state prerequisites like the template must exist. Context is clear but no exclusions or alternatives are provided.

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