add_embedded_image

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

Discloses base64 encoding, storage location, magic byte sniffing, and rejection of mismatched types. No annotations provided, so description carries burden well, though security/permissions not mentioned.

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?

Single paragraph front-loads main action, fairly concise but slightly run-on. Could be broken into clearer sentences.

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?

Covers main workflow and validation, but leaves ambiguity about two path parameters. No output schema, yet function is adequately described for typical use.

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 low (25%) and description only explains 'name' and 'mime_type' partially. It fails to clarify the difference between required parameters 'path' and 'image_path', leading to ambiguity.

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 tool reads an image file, base64-encodes it, stores it under EmbeddedImages, and lists supported MIME types. It distinguishes from siblings like 'add_body_image' by focusing on embedding rather than placing in body, though not explicitly.

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?

Description explains when to use (importing image files for embedding) and how to reference later, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives like 'add_body_image'.

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