Analyze food image

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds 'without logging,' which aligns with these hints and provides extra context about side effects. It does not contradict annotations, but it does not elaborate on other behaviors like rate limits or persistence.

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 sentence, making it concise. However, it omits critical details about parameters and usage, which reduces its effectiveness. It is front-loaded with the core action but sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 the tool's complexity (9 parameters, no output schema, 0% schema coverage), the description is far from complete. The agent cannot determine input requirements, output format, or how to use the various parameters. The description needs to elaborate on each parameter and provide examples or constraints.

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%, so the description must compensate for parameter documentation. The description does not mention any of the 9 parameters or their meanings. Parameters like image_description, barcode, detected_items, etc., remain entirely unexplained, leaving the agent without guidance on how to fill them.

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 the tool routes food image observations across barcode, nutrition label OCR, or meal-photo estimation, which indicates the main purpose. It also mentions 'without logging' to distinguish from sibling tools that might log. However, the verb 'route' is somewhat vague; a clearer verb like 'analyze' or 'process' would be more direct.

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. It mentions 'without logging,' which hints at a use case, but there is no explicit statement of appropriate contexts or exclusions. Sibling tools like nourish_estimate_meal_photo or nourish_lookup_barcode are not referenced.

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