Render Map

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

The annotation already indicates idempotency (idempotentHint=true). The description adds value by stating the image is returned inline and optionally saved, providing behavioral context beyond the annotation. No contradictions.

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 concise sentences front-load the primary action ('Render...to an image') and add secondary behavior. No fluff, every sentence adds value.

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?

Lacks details on output format (e.g., PNG, JPEG), that width/height control image dimensions, and how inline return works. With no output schema and similar sibling tools, more completeness would help differentiate.

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 explain parameters. It only mentions 'path' for file saving, but width and height are not described at all. Their defaults (800,600) are not mentioned either, leaving significant meaning unexplained.

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 tool renders the current map canvas to an image, returns it inline, and optionally saves to disk. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_canvas_screenshot, the verb 'render' and mention of file saving give a distinct purpose.

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?

No guidance on when to pick this over similar tools like get_canvas_screenshot or export_layout. The option to save to disk is mentioned but not framed as a key differentiator. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use context.

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