Set side image

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses meaningful behavior: the image is downloaded and re-encoded server-side, only png/jpeg/webp up to 5 MB are accepted, and http URLs, private/internal hosts, and non-images are rejected. This gives the agent a realistic model of what happens when the tool is invoked.

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 two sentences with no filler. The core action, permission, constraints, and identifier guidance are all front-loaded and each clause carries useful 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 simple three-parameter mutation, the description is nearly complete: it covers ownership, URL requirements, file constraints, server-side processing, and identifier sourcing. A minor gap is that there is no success/error return expectation described, and no output schema exists to fill that gap.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds value by instructing the agent to derive caseId and sideId from tribeunal_get_case's uuid fields and explicitly warning against numeric ids. This reduces the chance of passing incorrectly resolved identifiers.

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: 'Set or replace the image shown on a case side's vote card.' It is immediately clear what the tool does and what object it affects, and no sibling tool appears to overlap with this operation.

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 gives important usage context: it is owner-only, the image must come from a public https URL, and callers should use the uuid fields from tribeunal_get_case rather than numeric ids. It does not name alternatives, but no direct alternative exists among the siblings, so this is clear enough.

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