Resolve + 307-redirect to a scene's quicklook (external host).

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating no mutation. The description adds that the tool performs a 307-redirect, which is behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it doesn't elaborate on edge cases (e.g., missing scene) or that the actual image is not returned directly. No contradiction with 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 extremely concise at 8 words, front-loading the key action ('Resolve + 307-redirect'). However, it sacrifices clarity for brevity and could be expanded slightly to improve comprehension without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (redirect) and the presence of rich annotations, the description still lacks critical context: parameter meanings, expected inputs, and usage scenarios. The 0% schema coverage increases the need for description completeness, which is not met.

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%, meaning the JSON schema provides no parameter descriptions. The tool description does not mention any parameters or their roles. The agent has no guidance on what 'host_name' and 'image_id' represent, making correct invocation difficult.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'catalog.image.thumbnail'. The description only implies usage by naming the capability, but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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