qr_structure

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. It covers key operations (detecting patterns, estimating version/module size) and output dimensions. However, it does not mention error handling, false positives, or behavior on non-QR images, which would enhance transparency.

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?

The description is a single sentence that effectively lists the tool's capabilities. It is concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) for better readability.

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 moderate complexity and lack of output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (finder patterns, version, module size, dimensions). It does not detail the return format or data types, but the listed items give sufficient context for an agent to understand the output.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters, so parameter semantics are already clear from the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema—it does not explain the threshold parameter's role or provide examples.

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 specifies that the tool analyzes QR code structure, listing exact outputs: finder patterns, version, module size, and image dimensions. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like qr_data_extract or qr_detect, which focus on data extraction or detection.

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 analysis of QR code structure but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like qr_detect or qr_ecc_analysis. No when-not-to-use or alternative tool names are mentioned.

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