attach_image

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that images are presented to the AI as if uploaded by the user, requires client vision support, and is restricted to allowed directories. No contradictory or omitted behaviors.

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?

Four concise sentences, each providing essential information: purpose, behavior, format support, and constraints. No redundant or extraneous content. Information is front-loaded.

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 simple tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers purpose, usage, format, and requirements adequately. Could mention if images are stored temporarily, but not critical.

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 100%, but description adds value: explains the 'path' parameter accepts single or multiple images, and advises providing an array for compatibility. This goes beyond the schema's basic description.

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 clearly states the verb and resource: 'Attach an image file for AI vision analysis.' It explains the purpose (enable AI to see and describe visual content) and distinguishes from file operation siblings like delete_files, read_file, etc.

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?

Provides clear context: attaches images for AI vision, supports multiple images, lists supported formats, and notes prerequisites (MCP client vision capabilities, allowed directories). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or provide alternatives, but the sibling tools are sufficiently distinct.

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