read-ihdr

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral details. It only states the read operation, with no mention of return format, error handling, or limitations (e.g., PNG-only requirement). This is a significant gap for an agent selecting the tool without external 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core action and target with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise for a simple read operation, though it sacrifices informational depth.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and a single nested parameter, the description is too terse. It doesn't specify what IHDR metadata includes (width, height, bit depth, etc.) or what the tool returns, leaving the agent without sufficient context to anticipate the outcome.

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%, and the description does not compensate. It does not explain how the 'image' parameter should be structured (e.g., path, URL, base64, buffer) or what the enum 'kind' values mean. The description adds no value beyond the schema's property 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?

The description 'Read IHDR metadata from an image' uses a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('IHDR metadata'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling metadata readers like read-exif or read-xmp. The IHDR term is a well-known PNG header chunk, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention conditions or exclusions. However, the use of 'IHDR' in the name implies usage when IHDR-specific metadata is needed, providing an implicit usage context.

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