swu_get_image

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

The description discloses that the tool returns a URL and can select between front and back faces, which is useful. But with no annotations, it omits behaviors such as error handling when card identifiers are invalid, or whether it performs a network request. It also doesn't specify if it requires network access or authentication.

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?

Single sentence, no filler. Efficiently conveys the core purpose and the front/back option.

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?

The output schema covers return values, but the description does not sufficiently explain how to specify the card (name vs set_code vs card_number) or what happens when queries are ambiguous. Given the tool's simplicity, it is minimally functional but lacks important usage context.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only explains the 'back_face' parameter via the 'front or back' phrase. The roles of 'name', 'set_code', and 'card_number' are not clarified, and no precedence or required identifier is specified, leaving the agent without enough guidance to construct a valid request.

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 'Return' and identifies the resource as 'front or back image URL for a Star Wars Unlimited card.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like swu_lookup_card or swu_search_cards, which focus on card data rather than image URLs.

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 clearly implies it is used when an image URL is needed, and the front/back distinction provides context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, such as using swu_lookup_card if full card details are required.

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