Inspect photo metadata

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered and the description's 'Read-only: nothing is written' is largely redundant. However, it adds genuine behavioral context beyond the annotations: format-specific degradation (HEIC reports EXIF only) and the set of metadata blocks it surfaces.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with what is reported, then format edge case, then read-only guarantee and routing advice. No filler or repetition.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields and block types. Combined with the explicit read-only statement and the sibling routing note, an agent has everything needed to select and call it correctly.

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?

A single required 'path' parameter at 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents the input fully. The description adds no syntax, format, or constraint detail about the path (e.g., relative vs absolute, remote URLs), which matches the baseline 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb ('Report') and resource (photo metadata) and enumerates exactly what is reported: GPS, camera make/model, capture time, editing software, and present blocks. It also scopes supported formats (JPG/PNG/WebP, with HEIC limited to EXIF), which cleanly separates it from the write-side sibling strip_image_metadata.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative workflow: 'Use before strip_image_metadata to see what would be removed.' The condition that selects this tool over its sibling is stated outright rather than left to inference.

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