assets-get-texture-binary

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

No annotations exist, so the description should fully disclose behavior. It only claims to get size, which conflicts with the tool name. No mention of return types, side effects, or what the tool actually does (binary data vs size). Extremely opaque.

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 short but misleading. Conciseness is only valuable when accurate. It wastes its single sentence on incorrect information rather than being genuinely concise about the actual functionality.

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 has one nested parameter and no output schema, the description is critically incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns (binary data? size?), how to interpret the result, or any prerequisites. This is insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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% and the description does not add any additional meaning to the parameters (texture object with key and frame). Baseline score is appropriate as the schema already documents the parameters adequately.

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 says 'Get the size of the texture' but the tool name 'assets-get-texture-binary' implies retrieving binary data. This is misleading, and a sibling tool 'assets-get-texture-size' exists for size. The purpose is unclear and likely incorrect.

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 only mentions an alternative (assets-get-texture-content-bounding-box) for a specific sub-case but does not specify when to use this tool vs other texture tools like assets-get-texture-size. No usage context or prerequisites are provided.

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