Bild-Metadaten aktualisieren

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It fails to state whether updating is partial (only provided fields are changed), whether empty strings clear fields, or what permissions are needed. It also does not mention side effects or response behavior. For a mutation tool, this is a significant transparency gap.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no filler words and is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The description omits the 'caption' field present in the schema, and does not explain partial update semantics or required permissions. Given no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more context for safe invocation, but it is minimal and incomplete.

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 schema already describes all five parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description merely lists three of the fields and does not add extra semantics like the requirement to provide at least one updatable field, partial update behavior, or how fields interact. It adds no value beyond the schema.

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 action ('Aktualisiert') and the resource ('eines Bildes'), listing the specific fields (Alt-Text, Titel, Beschreibung). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like image_edit (which likely edits the binary file) and image_bulk_update_alt (which performs bulk updates).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it does not mention that image_bulk_update_alt is for bulk updates or that image_edit is for file editing. There are no exclusions or context for selecting this tool over siblings.

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