get_caption

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates this is a read operation ('取得する' = retrieve) and specifies the output format ('テキスト形式' = text format), which goes beyond what the tool name reveals. It does not mention error behavior or permissions, but the simple getter nature is transparent enough.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word is necessary, with no filler or repetition.

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?

The tool is simple, has an output schema (so return values are covered), and the description sufficiently explains what the tool does. The main gap is the lack of usage guidance, but for a straightforward getter, the description is adequate.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description merely restates the parameter names ('subfolder と filename を指定して') without providing additional meaning, format, or constraints. It vaguely indicates they identify which image's caption to retrieve, but does not clarify what values are valid or what subfolder refers to.

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 a specific action (retrieve/get), a specific resource (caption of a generated image), and the required parameters (subfolder and filename). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like get_picture and get_tag by specifying that it retrieves the caption in text format.

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 explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use it, or how it relates to get_picture or get_tag. The usage context is only implied by the tool name and siblings.

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