Google Compute Engine

list_images

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists Compute Engine Images. Details for each image include name, ID, status, family, and creation timestamp. Requires project as input.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`project`	Yes	Required. Project ID for this request.
`pageSize`	No	Optional. The maximum number of images to return.
`pageToken`	No	Optional. A page token received from a previous call to list images.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`images`	No	The list of images.
`nextPageToken`	No	A token that can be sent as `page_token` to retrieve the next page. If this field is omitted, there are no subsequent pages.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the requirement for a project and enumerates the returned fields, which is useful but not substantially beyond what annotations and output schema already imply. No contradictory behavior is disclosed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and every sentence adds value. The first sentence states the purpose, the second provides output details and the key input requirement. No unnecessary words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list tool with strong annotations, a complete input schema, and an output schema, the description provides an adequate overview. It covers the resource, output fields, and required input. The lack of usage guidance is a separate dimension and does not make the description incomplete for this simple tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description's mention of requiring a project only repeats the schema's required field. It does not add new semantic meaning to pageSize or pageToken beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Lists') and the resource ('Compute Engine Images'), and provides specific detail about the fields included (name, ID, status, family, creation timestamp). This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_disks and list_instances.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only notes that a project is required, which is a prerequisite rather than usage context. No exclusions or alternative tool recommendations are given.

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

All Google Compute Engine tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource-action combination. For resources with both basic and detailed getters (reservations, templates), the suffixes clearly differentiate them, and list vs get distinctions are unambiguous. No two tools appear to do the same thing.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case (e.g., create_instance, list_disks, get_zone_operation). Getters consistently use descriptive suffixes like basic_info, details, or properties. No mixed naming conventions or vague verbs.

Tool Count4/5

29 tools is slightly above the ideal range but justified given the breadth of Google Compute Engine resources covered (instances, disks, templates, reservations, commitments, MIGs, snapshots, images, machine types, accelerator types). Each tool serves a specific purpose and contributes to the overall scope.

Completeness2/5

The toolset is heavily read-oriented. While instances have full lifecycle coverage (create, delete, start, stop, reset, set machine type), most other resources lack write operations: disks, templates, reservations, commitments, snapshots, and MIGs only have get/list tools. This creates dead ends for agents needing to create or modify these resources, which is a significant gap for a GCE management server.

Resources

Need Help?