Get IT Glue Document Image

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context: the presigned download URL is valid for ~1 hour, and the response includes an embeddable inline_resource_url. This goes beyond what the annotations alone convey, though it stops short of describing error cases or response_format behavior.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The core action and returned fields are front-loaded, and the second sentence adds only the needed ID-location context. Every phrase 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?

For a read-only single-resource getter with rich annotations, a complete input schema, and an output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: what it returns, how to find the ID, and the URL expiry caveat. No important calling context is missing.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning to image_id by explaining how image IDs appear in section HTML and image lists, which helps the agent know what value to pass. response_format is fully documented in the schema and needs no additional prose.

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 opens with 'Get one document image by ID,' a specific verb and resource, and enumerates the exact returned fields (file name, size, owning document/gallery, inline_resource_url, presigned download URL). This makes the tool's function unambiguous and clearly distinct from siblings like itglue_get_document or itglue_delete_document_image.

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 makes it clear this is for retrieving a single image when an image_id is known, and it elaborates on where to find those IDs ('last path segment of <img src=...>' and 'Gallery/Step section image lists'). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the retrieval-by-ID context is strong enough to guide correct use.

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