analyze_image

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

无注解，描述补充了输入格式和分析类型，但未说明返回的具体内容、模型选择（如 qwen-vl-plus vs qwen-vl-max）对结果的影响，也未提及三个图片来源必须互斥这一行为。描述对行为透明度的贡献一般。

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?

描述仅两句话，第一句直接点明核心功能，第二句补充输入格式与用途，没有冗余信息，结构紧凑且前置信息充分。

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?

工具结构简单，参数 schema 覆盖完整，但描述未提及必须提供一种图片来源、未说明返回值或输出形式，且无注解补充，对于无输出 schema 的工具略显不完整。

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 描述覆盖率 100%，每个参数都有详细说明，描述本身没有额外解读参数，也没有需要补偿的缺口，故按基线 3 分评分。

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?

描述明确说明使用多模态模型分析图片内容，动作和对象具体，并列出支持的文件路径、Base64、URL 三种输入方式及应用场景。尽管没有兄弟工具需要区分，但功能定位已经足够清晰。

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?

描述清晰说明了适用于分析图片内容、识别文字/物体/场景/图表等场景，并列举了输入格式，提供了使用上下文。虽然没有明确排除场景或给出替代工具，但无兄弟工具时已算清晰。

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