load_local_image

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly explains that the image is loaded into an image cache, retains native resolution, and returns image_id plus dimensions. It could mention what happens on repeated loads or file-not-found behavior, but the core behavior is well described.

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 compact and front-loaded with the essential action, then explains the rationale and the exact usage sequence. Every sentence contributes value, and there is no redundant or vague wording.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides everything needed: what it does, why it is necessary, what it returns, and how to proceed after calling it. The guidance about using it once per brief and then cropping makes the tool's role in the overall workflow complete.

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 already fully describes the single parameter imagePath as a filesystem path to a PNG. The description adds useful context about the reference drawing and native resolution, but it does not fundamentally extend the parameter semantics beyond what the schema states, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Read a PNG from disk... into the image cache' and explicitly ties the tool to downstream cropping with crop_image. It clearly distinguishes this tool from the many sibling tools by explaining its unique role of loading local images for caching.

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 gives explicit usage direction: 'Use this ONCE per brief on the reference path you were given, then crop_image to read small text.' It also explains the problem it solves (inline base64 prevents zooming) and the correct sequence of operations, which leaves little ambiguity about when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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