list_predictionsList past generations, edits, and videos, with paging and an optional state filter.
Requires a connected Photo AI Studio account. Calling this tool starts the sign-in flow.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number, default 1 | |
| limit | No | Items per page, default 20, maximum 100 | |
| state | No | Filter by state |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond the readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint annotations, the description reveals that a connected Photo AI Studio account is required and that calling the tool starts the sign-in flow. This is a meaningful behavioral side effect not encoded in the annotations and critical for an agent to know before invoking.
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 two sentences with the core listing behavior front-loaded and the auth/sign-in context clearly separated. Every sentence carries necessary information without redundancy or filler.
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 list tool with optional paging and state filtering, the description covers scope, parameters, and an important auth side effect. No output schema is needed for an obvious list result, and the agent has sufficient context to invoke the tool correctly.
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 description coverage is 100%, so page, limit, and state are already documented in the input schema. The description's mention of 'paging' and 'state filter' adds minimal value beyond what the schema provides.
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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List past generations, edits, and videos,' clearly indicating a read-only collection operation. It distinguishes itself from sibling creation tools and from the singular get_prediction by emphasizing 'past' and batch listing.
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 the tool is for browsing past operations through 'List past' and the optional state filter, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over get_prediction or when not to use it. No alternative tools or exclusions are named, leaving usage guidance mostly to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.