batch_strip_selected_exif_fields

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It fails to disclose behavioral traits such as whether files are modified in-place, handling of output_folder, error behavior, or effects of parameters like overwrite, dry_run, or recursive.

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 sentence, but for a tool with 9 parameters and an output schema, it is too brief. It does not provide essential information, so it is under-specified rather than concise.

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 tool's complexity (9 parameters, many optional, no parameter descriptions, no behavioral disclosure), the description is grossly incomplete. It does not explain return values, param dependencies, or how to use the tool effectively.

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%, so the description must compensate. It gives no information about parameter semantics, formats, or examples for any of the 9 parameters, including required ones like folder_path and field_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 clearly states the action ('Remove'), the resource ('selected EXIF fields'), and the scope ('from supported images in a folder'). It distinguishes from sibling tools that strip all EXIF or GPS EXIF.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like batch_strip_exif, strip_selected_exif_fields, or when not to use it. Prerequisites or conditions are not mentioned.

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