import_image

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

Annotations show non-read-only and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral details: the rectangle defaults to image size unless overridden, scaleMode options, and the return shape {ok, nodeId, name, type}. No contradictions.

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 concise sentences. The first covers the core action and parameter options; the second covers defaults, scale, sibling alternative, and return. No wasted words, front-loaded.

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 9 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers essential usage: input sources, sizing, scaleMode, alternative, and return. It omits details like coordinate origin or error handling, but is adequate for a creation tool.

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 high (67-78%), but the description adds value by explaining the data/url relationship, default sizing, and scaleMode enum. It supplements the schema with usage context.

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 verb 'import' and the resource 'raster image' (PNG/JPG/GIF), and specifies the output as a rectangle with an IMAGE fill. It explicitly distinguishes from its sibling import_svg by directing SVG usage elsewhere.

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?

It provides clear context on when to use this tool (importing raster images) and when to use the alternative (import_svg for vector SVGs). It also explains that data can be provided as base64 or URL, and defaults for width/height and scaleMode.

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