extract_image_text

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behaviors. It mentions using multimodal OCR but does not explain what image formats are supported, whether there are size limits, how errors are handled, or what the return format is. The multiple image input methods in the schema are not acknowledged in the description.

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 concise sentence, front-loading the core purpose. However, it omits valuable context that would help the agent, so while efficient, it sacrifices completeness.

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 has 5 parameters with nested objects and multiple image input methods, and no output schema. The description fails to mention what the tool returns (extracted text) or any limitations. It is not sufficiently complete for an agent to use without additional guidance.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond 'extract text from images', meeting the baseline of 3. It does not elaborate on how to use the various image input methods.

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 tool extracts text from images using OCR, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings 'ask_about_image' and 'describe_image' by focusing on text content extraction rather than description or question answering.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives like 'ask_about_image' or 'describe_image'. The purpose is implied but not supported with contextual direction.

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