photographi_threshold_cull

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses side effects (moving files to rejects), mode options, processing limit, and fast mode behavior. It transparently explains default behavior and consequences.

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?

Description is concise (two sentences), front-loaded with core action, and every sentence adds value. No redundant information.

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 7 parameters, low schema coverage, and no annotations, description covers threshold behavior, defaults, mode, processing limit, and sibling comparison. But misses explanation for enable_subject_detection and offset. Output schema exists, so return format not needed.

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 43% (3 of 7 params described). Description adds meaning: explains min_confidence default, processing 100 per call, mode options. However, parameters like enable_subject_detection, limit, and offset are not explained beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states binary threshold culling for images, moving low-confidence ones to 'rejects' subfolder, and distinguishes from sibling photographi_cull_photographs by higher default threshold and different folder name.

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?

Description explicitly compares with sibling tool and provides context for when to use this stricter filtering. It mentions processing 100 images per call and mode options, but does not explicitly state when not to use.

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