configure_ocr

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

The description adds helpful context beyond the input schema by stating that this is the default OCR language and that the setting is session-scoped. It does not disclose invalid-language behavior, whether the change affects in-flight operations, or whether it can be reset, and there are no annotations to carry that burden.

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 communicates exactly what the tool does with zero filler. Every word contributes to purpose or scope.

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 one-parameter setter, the description and schema together are sufficient for an agent to make the call. The only gap is absence of guidance about edge cases like invalid language codes or default reset behavior, which is minor here.

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 input schema already fully explains the language parameter with examples. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, which matches the baseline of 3 when the schema handles the semantics.

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 ('Set, resource, scope ('the default OCR language for the session). This leaves no ambiguity about what operation is performed. It also helps distinguish configure_ocr from the many interaction/read siblings since none of them do configuration.

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?

Usage is implied: an agent can infer to call this tool when it needs to set the OCR language for the current session. However, there are no explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance, and no exclusions such as when OCR defaults are unnecessary.

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