novelai_schema

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that the schema is 'bundled official', offering minimal extra behavioral context and no information on return shape or lookup cost.

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 tightly packed sentences with no filler; the purpose leads and the accepted inputs follow immediately.

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 two-parameter, zero-required introspection tool with no output schema, the description conveys enough to invoke it correctly. It could say a bit more about what a 'catalog' response contains, but nothing essential is missing.

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 0%, so the description must carry the load, and it does reasonably well: it names the 'catalog' mode (matching the default) and gives a concrete definition example ('image.RequestParameters'). It stops short of explaining the operation-vs-definition precedence.

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?

States a specific verb (Inspect) and resource (the bundled official image API schema and every parameter), which is a distinct capability among the siblings. It does not explicitly contrast itself with any sibling, but 'schema inspection' is self-evidently different from generate/upscale/history.

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?

'Use catalog, an operation name, or a definition such as image.RequestParameters' tells the agent which values the tool accepts, which is call-format guidance rather than when-to-use guidance. It never says when this tool should be preferred or what problem it solves for the agent.

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