show_picture

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

With no annotations and a 5-word description, the tool's behavioral traits are entirely undisclosed. There is no mention of side effects, permissions, state changes, or output. The description does not add any value beyond the name.

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 extremely concise but at the cost of clarity. It provides no structure or helpful detail, making it underspecified rather than efficiently informative.

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 complexity (10 parameters, 6 required) and the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is completely inadequate. An AI agent cannot determine correct invocation or parameter roles from this minimal text.

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 only 10% (just one parameter has a brief description). The description adds no explanation for the 10 parameters, including 6 required ones. It fails to clarify how parameters like projectPath, mapId, eventId, and pageIndex relate to showing a picture.

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 'Show a picture in an event' is vague. It identifies a verb and resource but does not clarify whether this tool displays a picture during gameplay, inserts a command into an event, or previews an asset. Among 27 siblings like add_choice and draw_map_tile, it fails to distinguish its specific role.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools for event commands, there is no indication of prerequisites, context, or when to choose show_picture over add_item or update_event_command.

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