krita_inspect_diffusion_document

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds helpful scoping by saying it reads 'existing' metadata and does not mutate state, but it does not add substantial behavioral detail beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a useful exclusion. No wasted words, and the structure makes the read-only intent immediately clear.

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 read-only tool with strong annotations, the description covers the main behavior and non-behaviors. However, there is no output schema and no description of what the returned metadata contains, and instance_id remains ambiguous, leaving some gaps for an agent.

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 needed to explain the parameters, but it only loosely maps to document_id via 'explicit document.' instance_id is entirely unexplained, and the description adds no meaning beyond the property names and titles in the schema.

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 ('Read') and resource ('existing AI Diffusion metadata for the explicit document'), and immediately clarifies what it does not do. This clearly distinguishes it from generation, configuration, and settings-related diffusion tools.

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 says the tool does not create models, change settings, or generate images, giving clear negative usage guidance. However, it does not name a positive alternative, such as 'use generate_diffusion when you want to create an image,' so it stops short of full when-to-use guidance.

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