get_image

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool retrieves 'detailed information' but doesn't specify what that includes (e.g., metadata, size, tags), whether it's a read-only operation, or any error conditions (e.g., invalid ID). This leaves behavioral traits unclear for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get detailed information') without unnecessary words. Every part of the sentence contributes to understanding the tool's function, making it appropriately 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 low complexity (single parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, without annotations or an output schema, it fails to explain what 'detailed information' entails or potential behavioral aspects, leaving gaps in completeness for a retrieval tool.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'id' parameter documented as 'Image ID or name'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples or constraints. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Get' and the resource 'detailed information about a specific image', which distinguishes it from siblings like 'list_images' (which lists multiple images) and 'remove_image' (which deletes an image). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'get_container' or other 'get_' tools beyond the resource type.

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 implies usage when detailed information about a specific image is needed, as opposed to 'list_images' for multiple images. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like 'get_container' for container details or prerequisites such as needing the image ID.

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