place_image

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral transparency. It mentions 'Place an image' and scaling/fitting but does not disclose side effects (e.g., overwriting, link behavior), required permissions, error conditions, or whether images are embedded or linked. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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, which is concise but under-specified. It could include more detail without being verbose, such as mentioning that the image is placed on the active page or that the tool requires an open document.

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?

Given the complexity of 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is inadequate. It fails to explain parameter interactions (e.g., how width/height and scale interact), default behaviors, or prerequisites, leaving significant gaps for an LLM agent.

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% with detailed descriptions for all 8 parameters. The description adds a high-level summary ('scaling and fitting options') but does not elaborate on relationships or default behaviors beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states 'Place an image on the active page with scaling and fitting options', identifying the action, resource, and key features. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'place_file_on_page' which also places files; the image-specific scaling/fitting options are implied but not explicitly contrasted.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., place_file_on_page, create_rectangle). The description lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., active document) or when scaling/fitting options are applicable.

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