Insert an image

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

Without annotations, the description fully discloses the local file upload workflow (uploaded to Drive, embedded, temp upload removed), states this is a direct edit not a tracked suggestion, and explains the header invisibility behavior — substantial behavioral context.

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?

Four sentences cover the core behavior, positioning, sizing, alignment, header specifics, edit type, and a limitation — every sentence carries useful information with no redundancy.

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 12 parameters and no output schema, the description addresses the main use cases (body and header images), the local file lifecycle, and the API restriction on floating images, making it sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 83%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful context to `at` (top/end/unique text anchor) and `segment` (letterhead logo example), going beyond the schema's field descriptions.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Insert') and resource ('inline image'), and clarifies sources (public URL or local file), distinguishing from siblings like insert_table or insert_content. It clearly states the action and scope.

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?

It provides context for segment header as the place for a letterhead logo and notes that floating/text-wrapped images are not supported, giving implicit guidance on when this tool applies. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools for unsupported cases.

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