get_image_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description does not need to reiterate safety. It adds value by specifying the default behavior of using the front image when omitted, which is a behavioral trait beyond the structured annotations.

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?

Two sentences with no extraneous information. The first sentence lists the output attributes, the second provides parameter guidance. Everything is front-loaded and efficient.

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 simple tool (one optional parameter, annotations for safety, and an output schema), the description covers the essential aspects: what is returned and how to specify the image. No additional information is necessary.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description compensates by explaining the default behavior for the single parameter ('uses the front image when image_title is omitted'). However, it does not describe the parameter's type or accepted values (e.g., exact window title string), relying on the schema which contains a description but is not counted. This provides marginal additional value.

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 'Read dimensions, channel/frame/slice counts, bit depth, and ROI statistics for one image.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from siblings like list_open_images (which lists image titles) by focusing on detailed metadata of a single image.

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 description includes 'Uses the front image when image_title is omitted,' which gives a clear default behavior and context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like search_commands or list_open_images, though the purpose implicitly distinguishes it.

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