Describe UI

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

With no annotations, the description partially carries the burden. It reveals the tool's output (description plus optional code) but does not confirm it is read-only, describe any side effects, or mention rate limits. The behavioral traits are implied but not fully transparent.

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?

The description is two sentences with no fluff. The main action is front-loaded, and the optional behavior is added concisely. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given no output schema, the description should specify output format. It mentions 'description' and 'sketch' but does not clarify if the output is plain text or structured. Also, it could provide more context on image path requirements (e.g., supported formats). Adequate but with gaps.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining how to use the 'question' parameter to request code generation ('Ask for code/markup to also get a JSX/HTML+CSS sketch'). This aids correct 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 'describe' and specific resource 'UI screenshot', covering layout, components, and style. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like 'analyze_data_visualization' by focusing on UI, making it easy to select.

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 lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not compare with siblings or mention alternatives. The only hint is the phrase 'UI screenshot', which implicitly limits usage but is not sufficient for clear decision-making.

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