load_reference

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It only discloses the mutual exclusivity constraint. It does not mention what happens if the ref_id already exists, error handling, file size limits, permission needs, or whether the operation is destructive.

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, 20 words, front-loaded with verb and resource, no redundant information. Every word earns its place.

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 description covers the main action and purpose, and references two sibling tools, but lacks details on error behavior, id uniqueness, path resolution, and output. For a storage tool with no output schema, more behavioral context would improve completeness.

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 67%, and the description adds little beyond what the schema already provides (mutual exclusivity is restated). The purpose clause ('for quantizing or side-by-side viewing') gives context but does not enhance parameter semantics.

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 verb 'Store' and resource 'reference PNG', specifies that it is supplied via one of two mutually exclusive inputs (png_base64 or path), and identifies the purpose ('for quantizing or side-by-side viewing'), which distinguishes it from siblings like quantize_reference and view_reference.

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 implies usage context by mentioning the purpose and the mutual exclusivity of inputs, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it provide guidance on when not to use it or prerequisites.

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