Px View Image

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It does state that the image is downscaled to max_side and returned as MCP image content preceded by an info dict. However, it does not explicitly say the operation is read-only, what the info dict contains, or how errors are handled.

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?

A single sentence with a parenthetical, front-loaded with the main purpose and key behavior. There is no fluff, and the essential constraint (downscaling) is included without distraction.

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 gives the core return shape (image content + info dict) but not the contents of the info dict, error behavior, or any constraints on the input path. Without an output schema or annotations, these omissions leave some uncertainty for correct invocation and result interpretation.

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 must compensate. It explains max_side well ('downscaled to max_side for token sanity'), but path is only implied as the image file source and is not given explicit semantics such as supported formats, file system scope, or required access.

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 it returns an image file as MCP image content, with downscaling, so the caller can see it. This distinguishes it from px_image_base64 by emphasizing visual content, but it does not explicitly differentiate it from the sibling px_view_images.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as px_view_images or px_image_base64. There are no stated conditions, exclusions, or preferences, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and schema.

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