get_image

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

The description discloses the core behavior by listing the specific metadata fields returned. With no annotations provided, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it describe behavior for missing or invalid image names.

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?

The description is a single sentence with the resource front-loaded and the returned attributes presented as a clear colon-delimited list. There is no filler or redundant wording.

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 one-parameter getter, the description covers the key output fields and resource scope, and since no output schema exists, the field list is valuable. It still lacks parameter detail and explicit usage context, making it adequate but not robust.

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 schema's 'name' parameter has no description (0% coverage), and the description only loosely ties the parameter to an image datablock. It does not clarify what format the name should take or how to reference an image in the datablock.

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 identifies the resource as 'one image datablock' and enumerates the returned metadata fields (resolution, depth, colour space, path), making the tool's purpose clear. It does not use an explicit verb like 'retrieves' and does not name a sibling, so it stops short of the strongest differentiation.

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 singular 'one image datablock' implies this tool is for per-image metadata rather than listing all images, which gives some usage context. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to use this versus siblings like list_images or load_image, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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