get_task_report_map_images

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says nothing about whether this is a read-only lookup, what permissions are needed, whether images are paginated or bounded, or what the returned payload looks like.

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 text is short, but it is simply the same phrase duplicated in Chinese and English with no additional content. Brevity here reflects under-specification rather than efficient front-loading.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and zero parameter documentation, the description leaves everything about this tool unspecified. A caller cannot determine required inputs, filtering behavior, or return shape from it.

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 description coverage is 0% and there are two parameters, neither explained. The description does not clarify what task_report_id identifies or what robot_sn is for (e.g., filtering by robot when a report spans multiple robots).

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 bilingual phrase states a verb and resource ('Get report map images'), so the agent knows it retrieves images. However, it gives no scope (which images, per task report?) and does not distinguish itself from siblings such as get_map_canvas, list_map_resources, or list_task_resources.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many map/task-report siblings, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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