images

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the 'up to ten' limit and the selection format (N or START:END), providing useful constraints. However, it does not explain what happens on invalid handles or selection ranges, or what 'cached' implies about freshness.

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?

One well-structured sentence that front-loads the action, limit, and selection format. No redundant 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 presence of an output schema means return values need not be described. The description covers the tool's purpose, key parameters, and selection syntax, which is sufficient for a moderately complex tool. It lacks context about the meaning of the handle components or caching behavior, but overall is adequate.

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 0% description coverage, but the description explains the 'handle' parameter as 'r<run>.<s>.<i>' and 'selection' as 'N or START:END', providing semantics beyond the raw schema. This compensates well for the missing schema descriptions.

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 tool downloads up to ten cached images for a given item handle, with a specific selection syntax. It distinguishes from sibling tools (product, search, quote) which are not about image downloading.

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 when a user needs cached images for a specific item handle, but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives or state when not to use. No exclusions or alternative tool references.

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