get_tracked_images

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's claim of 'Gets' is consistent. The description adds detail on returned data (detected, poses, quality) but no additional behavioral context like auth requirements or rate limits, which is acceptable given annotation coverage.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource, containing no filler. Every word contributes to understanding.

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 read-only query tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and outputs. It could mention the return format or filtering options, but the parameters handle filtering implicitly. Overall, adequate.

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 100%, so the description adds minimal extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It mentions 'poses' and 'tracking quality', which maps to parameters like includePose and trackingState, but does not elaborate on syntax or usage.

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 'Gets' and the resource 'current state of tracked images', listing specific aspects: which images are detected, poses, and tracking quality. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_tracking_image' (adds) and 'configure_image_tracking' (configures).

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 implies usage for querying tracking state but lacks explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives like 'get_detected_planes' or 'get_hand_state'. No exclusions or context are provided.

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