visual_describe

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits like authentication needs, side effects, or output format. The description is too brief to inform the agent about important behavioral aspects.

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?

Extremely short, but at the cost of missing crucial information. A single sentence is concise, but not earn its place if it lacks necessary detail. Could be restructured to include more context without being 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?

Failed to provide sufficient context for a tool with three required parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description does not explain what 'describe' returns or how the parameters relate to the operation.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description adds no meaning to the three parameters. While parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory (projectPath, pageName, visualName), the description does not clarify required formats or constraints.

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 the tool describes a visual, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like visual_list (list) or visual_add (create). However, it could be more specific about what 'describe' entails (e.g., properties, configuration).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as visual_list for multiple visuals or visual_set_format for modification. No context about prerequisites or exclusions.

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