Get page image

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden; it usefully discloses the return format and resolution. However, it says nothing about error behavior for invalid pages, whether the image is cached, permissions, or size/pagination implications for large documents.

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, front-loaded with what is returned, followed by the prerequisite step. No filler or redundancy.

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 read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, output format, and the prerequisite lookup. Minor gaps remain around failure modes and how this differs from sibling image/page tools, but nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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 doc_id and page are already documented; the description only adds the notion that page must be located via search first. That is useful workflow context but adds little semantic depth beyond the schema.

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 and resource ('Return the rendered image ... of a document page') and adds concrete output traits (PNG, 1600 px long side) plus example use cases (wiring sheet, hydraulic scheme, drawing). It doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings like get_page or get_document_images, so the boundary is inferred rather than stated.

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?

Gives an explicit prerequisite workflow: 'Use search or find_sheet to find the page number first,' which tells the agent how to satisfy the required page parameter. It does not say when to prefer this over get_page or get_document_images, so the alternative-selection guidance is incomplete.

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