view_image

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that: it only reads local files, accepts only .png/.jpg, and caps at 16 MB, which is useful operational constraint disclosure.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the action and appends the format/size constraints. Nothing is wasted.

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 read-only, single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, formats, and size limit. The remaining gap is path format/form resolution, a minor omission given the low complexity.

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% and the single 'path' parameter is undocumented in the schema. The description partially compensates by implying the path points to a local .png/.jpg under 16 MB, but it doesn't specify absolute vs. relative path format or resolution of the path.

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 and resource ('Montre une image locale') and clarifies the object with examples ('un rendu terminé, une capture') plus format/size constraints. It is clear what the tool does, but it doesn't explicitly distinguish it from the sibling 'screenshot' tool, leaving ambiguity about which to pick.

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?

Usage is implied by the examples ('a finished render, a screenshot'), suggesting you point it at an existing local file. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance, and no mention of choosing this over the 'screenshot' sibling.

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