annotate

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

No annotations provided. Description says it modifies the image but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether original is overwritten, permissions needed, or if the operation is reversible). Returns results but lacks detail on behavior.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with action and supported types. Efficient but could be better structured to include parameter hints. Not overly verbose.

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?

Lacks essential details about the 'annotations' parameter structure, coordinate system, and output format. With 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 0%. The description does not explain any of the four parameters (path, normalized, annotations, output_path). The 'annotations' array has no defined structure, which is a critical gap. The description adds no value 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?

Description clearly states the tool draws multiple annotation types (bbox, arrow, etc.) on an image and returns an annotated image and manifest JSON. It specifies the verb and resource, and the list of annotation types distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle a single type.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like draw_bounding_box or highlight_region. No prerequisites or exclusions mentioned. The description assumes the agent knows the context.

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