ocr_image

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and it does so substantially: it lists supported source formats (local path, file://, http(s), data URI) and specifies the success/error response shape. It doesn't mention side effects or permissions, but the operation is naturally read-only and the return/error contract is disclosed.

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?

Three short sentences front-load the core purpose, then cover input formats and response contract without repetition or filler. Every sentence adds necessary 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?

For a single-parameter OCR tool with no output schema, the description provides the essential invocation and response information, including error behavior. It does not mention limits such as file size or sync/async behavior, but these are not critical for basic correct use and are reasonable gaps.

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 0%, so the description is the only source of parameter meaning. It fully explains what 'source' can be with concrete examples for all four accepted formats, going far beyond the bare string type.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'OCR single image' and return Markdown. '单张' (single) distinguishes it from siblings like ocr_pdf and ocr_long_image, so an agent can tell them apart.

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 intended use case (single image OCR) is clear from the purpose statement, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over siblings such as ocr_pdf or ocr_long_image, or when not to use it. This is implied rather than stated.

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