getPageImages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but doesn't describe how it behaves: for example, it doesn't specify the return format (e.g., list of image URLs or metadata), error handling for invalid paths, permissions required, or whether it's a read-only operation. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every part of the sentence contributes directly to understanding the tool's function, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 complexity (retrieving images from a page, potentially including fragments), lack of annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address return values, error conditions, or behavioral nuances, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use the tool effectively beyond its basic purpose.

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 input schema has one parameter with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It implies the parameter is a page path but doesn't add details like format (e.g., absolute path), examples, or constraints. This provides minimal semantic value beyond the schema, aligning with the baseline for incomplete coverage.

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 ('Get') and resource ('all images from a page'), including the scope of 'those within Experience Fragments'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'getPageContent' or 'getPageTextContent' by focusing specifically on images. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'scanPageComponents' which might also retrieve images, preventing a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'scanPageComponents' or 'getPageContent'. It lacks context about prerequisites, such as whether the page must exist or be accessible, and doesn't mention any exclusions or specific scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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