Analyze a retail shelf photo to count products, detect gaps, and verify planogram compliance, returning a JSON or markdown report.
Run count, gap detection, and (optionally) a planogram check on one image and return a combined JSON and/or markdown report.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| params | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| image | Yes | ||
| report | Yes | ||
| markdown | No | ||
| annotated | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose potential side effects, permissions, rate limits, or whether the tool is read-only. The description only mentions what it does, not behavioral constraints.
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 that clearly states the main function and output. It is well-structured and free of unnecessary detail.
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 description covers the core functionality but omits mention of optional features like format selection, annotation, and price-tag reading. While the schema fills some gaps, the description alone is not fully complete for an agent to understand all capabilities.
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 already provides detailed descriptions for most parameters (e.g., image, slots, conf, annotate, include_price_tags). The tool description adds little beyond stating the high-level purpose, so it contributes minimal 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 the tool runs count, gap detection, and optionally a planogram check, returning a combined report. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by combining these functionalities, though it does not explicitly mention the format or price-tag options.
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 combined tool versus the individual sibling tools (e.g., count_products, detect_gaps, check_planogram). Agents must infer the appropriate context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.