attach_photo

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

With no annotations, description fails to disclose side effects (e.g., replaces existing photo?), error conditions, or authentication needs. Only states the basic action of attaching, missing critical behavioral context.

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?

Description is a single sentence with an example, no redundant information. Concisely communicates core functionality.

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 the tool has 4 parameters and an output schema (undescribed), the description lacks details on return values, constraints, and prerequisite conditions. Completeness is insufficient for an agent to reliably use the tool.

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 0%. Description only provides an example for 'object_type' and notes 'caption' is optional, but does not explain 'object_id', 'file_path' (format/location), or 'caption' constraints. Adds almost no meaning beyond parameter names.

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?

Description clearly states the action (attach photo) and target (object) with an example using 'map_item'. It distinguishes from sibling upload tools by specifying 'photo' versus documents/drawings, but could be more explicit about the distinction.

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?

Provides an example of when to use (attaching to map_item) but lacks guidance on prerequisites, alternative tools (e.g., upload_document for non-photo files), or when not to use this tool.

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