get_file_info_tool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It documents return values (URL, size, dimensions, MIME type) but omits safety traits (read-only status), error handling (file not found behavior), and authentication requirements.

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?

Uses efficient docstring format (Args/Returns) with zero filler. The opening sentence states purpose immediately, followed by precise parameter and return documentation. Every line provides essential information.

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?

Appropriately complete for a single-parameter metadata tool with output schema. The description documents return values comprehensively, though mentioning error cases (e.g., non-existent files) would strengthen completeness.

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 coverage is 0%, leaving the filename parameter undocumented in structured fields. The description fully compensates by clarifying it accepts 'File name (with or without "File:" prefix)', providing critical syntax semantics absent from 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') with clear resource ('file/image metadata') and scope ('from the wiki'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like get_page_tool (content vs. metadata) and list_files_tool (retrieval vs. enumeration).

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 implicit usage guidance by noting the filename accepts 'File:' prefix variations, but lacks explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison to alternatives like list_files_tool for discovery scenarios.

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