Analyze image

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses accepted input channels and the intended-use gate, but says nothing about return format, latency/cost, whether image data is sent to a remote service, or any permission requirements.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the capability, then the usage gate, then example use cases. No filler and nothing buried.

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 two-parameter tool this covers inputs and when-to-use well, but with no output schema and no annotations the description should not be silent on what comes back from the analysis or on the handling of the supplied image data.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented and 3 is the baseline. The description restates the source formats already in the schema and adds no guidance on the prompt parameter (e.g., how specific it should be).

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 ("Analyze an image") and enumerates the accepted source forms (local path, HTTP(S) URL, base64 data URI). It is trivially separable from its only sibling, analyze_video, by resource type, though it never explicitly contrasts with it.

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 gating rule: use ONLY when you cannot view the image yourself, and answer from native vision otherwise. It also names concrete contexts (screenshots, UI, OCR, diagrams, photos, visual debugging), leaving no inference needed about when to reach for it.

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