import_image

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

Annotations show readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds useful behavioral details: rectangle defaults to image size, scaleMode options with default, and the return object shape. However, it does not address mutual exclusivity of data/url or error handling.

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?

Three concise sentences front-load the purpose, then provide defaults, scaleMode, sibling alternative, and return value. No wasted 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?

Given the tool's complexity (9 params, no output schema), the description covers the main purpose, accepted formats, defaults, return value, and a sibling alternative. It omits the implicit requirement of providing either data or url, which would be helpful.

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 descriptions cover 67% of params. The description clarifies the data/url alternatives and explains scaleMode options with default FILL, which the schema lacks. It doesn't cover x/y, but those are straightforward positional parameters.

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 ('Import') and resource ('raster image... place it as a rectangle with an IMAGE fill'), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling tool import_svg for vector graphics.

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?

Explicitly directs vector SVG users to import_svg, and implies raster image use cases. This provides clear when-to-use guidance and an explicit alternative.

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