Remove photo metadata

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

Annotations only declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false); the description goes well beyond that by disclosing that a copy is written, the original is untouched, existing files are never overwritten, the operation is lossless (no re-encode), HEIC fails, and what the call returns. That is exactly the extra behavioral context the annotations cannot carry.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with what the tool does and what it preserves, then side effects, then return value, then the routing hint. No filler and nothing repeated from structured fields.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining the return ('the new path and what was removed') and does so, plus covers failure mode, overwrite behavior, and format limits. An agent has everything needed to invoke 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (input, output, keep_color_profile) are already documented including the default naming pattern and default true for keep_color_profile. The description adds only the supported-format constraint relevant to input, which the schema does not state; otherwise it does not extend parameter meaning.

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?

Names a precise verb+resource (remove metadata from a photo copy) and immediately scopes the supported formats and the lossless behavior. It also names the sibling inspect_image_metadata, so an agent can distinguish this from the read-only inspector without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit prerequisite ('Use inspect_image_metadata first to see what is there') and a clear when-not (HEIC is rejected with an error). This routes the agent to the right sibling and prevents a doomed call.

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