get_media_recipes_by_recipe_images_by_file_name

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

Without annotations, the description reveals that the tool is proxied and not for production use, a key behavioral trait. However, it omits details like authentication requirements, error handling, or response format, which are relevant for a tool with zero annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core action and including a critical note about proxying. Every sentence adds essential information without unnecessary fluff.

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?

For a simple image retrieval tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and a key constraint (proxied/non-production). However, it lacks details on output format, error conditions, and differentiation from sibling media tools, leaving some gaps.

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 description mentions 'takes in a recipe id' but does not describe the file_name parameter or its enum values, despite the schema having only 0% coverage. It adds minimal value beyond the schema by stating the overall purpose but lacks parameter-specific guidance.

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 tool retrieves a static image given a recipe ID and file name. It uses specific verbs ('returns') and resources ('static image'), and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning it's proxied and not for production.

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 explicitly notes that the route is proxied and should not hit the API in production, providing clear context on when to use it. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with similar tools like get_media_recipes_by_recipe_assets_by_file_name.

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