Retrieve asset OCR data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only that all OCR data for the asset is returned, without noting behavior for assets with no OCR results, response shape, or size limits.

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 short sentences plus an endpoint tag; the purpose is front-loaded and nothing is padded. The repeated title line is slightly redundant but harmless.

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 simple single-parameter read with no output schema, the definition is minimally sufficient but leaves the return shape ('OCR data' could be text, boxes, confidence scores) and empty-result behavior unspecified. A brief note on what the OCR payload contains would close the gap.

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?

There is a single required parameter and schema description coverage is 100% ('format: uuid'), so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds no extra meaning about the id beyond what the schema states, which is the baseline case for high coverage.

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 states a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('OCR data associated with the specified asset'), which separates it from generic siblings like immich_get_asset_metadata or immich_get_asset_info. It does not explicitly name a sibling to route against, but the resource is narrow enough that an agent can identify it.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as immich_get_asset_metadata, immich_get_asset_info, or immich_search_asset_files. The only implicit guidance is the word 'OCR', leaving context and prerequisites to inference.

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