local_ydb_pull_image

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only and non-idempotent, and the description adds that starting a background pull is a side effect. It also discloses the special case when the image is already present (no pull). This goes beyond annotations.

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 deliver full purpose and conditional behavior. No redundancy; every clause adds value.

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?

Given no output schema and 4 well-described parameters, the description covers key outcomes (plan vs execute, status jobId). It lacks error scenarios but is sufficient for guided usage.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining how confirm toggles behavior and that image defaults to profile. It avoids repeating schema text.

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 a specific verb-plan or start-and clearly identifies the resource (Docker pull for a local-ydb image). It distinguishes two modes (plan-only vs execute) and uniquely labels the tool among many siblings that deal with other operations.

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 explains when to use confirm=true versus false and notes the resulting jobId links to local_ydb_pull_status. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or suggest alternatives beyond the implicit status tool.

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