Unbenutzte Bilder finden

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the core function without revealing how 'unused' is determined, whether it is read-only, what the return format is, or whether it covers all content types or just posts/pages. This lack of detail leaves significant ambiguity for a tool with zero annotation support.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any filler or redundancy. Every word contributes to the meaning, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description gives the essential purpose but omits useful context such as what the return value looks like (e.g., list of IDs), how usage is defined, and potential limitations. It is not incomplete enough to be unusable, but it leaves gaps that could confuse an agent.

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 has one parameter (limit) with a description ('Maximale Anzahl') and 100% schema coverage. The description itself adds no additional meaning about the parameter, but the schema already clearly documents its purpose. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema handles the burden.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Findet Bilder' (finds images) with a clear scope—images not used in any post/page. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like image_find_missing_alt (missing alt text) and image_delete_unused (deletion). The purpose is immediately clear and unambiguous.

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 when to use the tool (for finding unused images) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or how it compares to alternatives such as image_find_missing_alt or image_delete_unused. There is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions, so usage context is only implied.

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