add_footer_image

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is destructive, requires permissions, or how the image is placed. The brief reference to 'add_header_image' does not compensate for the missing transparency.

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 extremely concise (one short sentence), but it lacks substance. Conciseness is present, but the content is insufficient, resulting in a borderline adequate score.

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 complexity of 8 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It provides almost no context about how the tool works, what the parameters mean, or what happens after invocation.

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?

With only 13% schema description coverage (only 'value' has a description), the description adds no parameter details. It fails to explain critical parameters like 'top', 'left', 'width', 'height', or the enum 'image_source'. The schema's limited descriptions are not supplemented.

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 says 'Same as add_header_image, for <PageFooter>.' This is vague and relies on understanding another tool's description. It does not explicitly state that the tool adds an image to a page footer, leaving the purpose unclear without external context.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not specify scenarios, exclusions, or compare with sibling tools like add_footer_textbox or add_body_image.

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