Read QR Code

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds little beyond stating it decodes 'any' QR code. This is adequate but not exceptional given the strong annotation coverage.

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 concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. No filler or redundant information, earning its place.

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 read operation with output schema present (context indicates), the description covers the input and output sufficiently. It does not need to detail return values, and no gaps are evident.

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 input schema covers all parameters with a description for 'fileurl'. The description reiterates the parameter's purpose ('image URL') but does not add new semantics beyond what the schema provides. Hence, baseline 3.

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 the action ('Decode a QR code'), the input ('from an image URL'), and the output ('extracts the encoded text or URL'). It also distinguishes from the sibling tool 'qrserver.qr.generate' by indicating the opposite operation. The mention of 'goqr.me' provides context for the service.

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 description implies usage when a QR code image URL is available, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like other image processing tools or when not to use it. No comparison with siblings is provided.

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