render_image

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention that the default zoom parameter will modify the view (zoom/orient onto selection) before rendering, which contradicts the phrase 'current scene.' It also does not disclose whether the tool has side effects on the scene state or how rendering is performed (blocking vs async).

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. Every word contributes directly to understanding the tool's core function.

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 is minimal for a tool with five parameters and no annotations or output schema. It does not explain the return format beyond 'inline,' nor does it mention the zoom-orient side effect or when to use this tool relative to save_file for persistent images. It provides enough to get started, but leaves important context untold.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage with detailed parameter descriptions, so baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter context; it does not explain the zoom behavior or how selection interacts with rendering beyond what the schema states.

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 uses a specific verb ('Ray-trace') and resource ('the current scene to a PNG'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like orient/zoom that manipulate the view without producing an image. It also states the output format and delivery mechanism.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when you need a rendered PNG of the current scene. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, nor does it mention related tools like save_file for saving images, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to select it for rendering.

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