images_add

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden; it usefully discloses the allowed_roots / FEA_UNRESTRICTED permission gate. However it does not say that registration is a state-changing operation that persists, what happens on duplicate names, or how failures surface.

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?

Two efficient sentences with the core action and supported formats front-loaded, followed by the eligibility constraint. No filler, every clause carries information.

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 4-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose and the permission gate but omits the semantics of label and timezone, duplicate-name behavior, and whether a registration handle/ID is returned.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only loosely covers two of four parameters ('short name' for name, image formats for path) and says nothing about label or timezone, leaving half the parameters undocumented in both schema and prose.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Register a disk image') plus the supported image formats (raw, split raw .001, E01) and the name binding. It does not explicitly contrast with the closest sibling images_list, which lists rather than registers 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?

It states an explicit precondition (paths must be under allowed_roots, or FEA_UNRESTRICTED=1 must be set) and names the fallback when that condition fails (register on the host with `fea images add`). This is a clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use with an alternative route.

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