list_image_formats

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It clearly indicates a read-only listing operation and describes the content of the output (dimensions and use cases). It does not discuss permissions or side effects, but for a simple listing tool, this is sufficient.

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 front-loads the action ('List all...') and specifies what the output contains. Every word adds value, and there is no 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?

Given the low complexity (1 optional parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and output content. It could explicitly state that all presets are returned when no category is provided, but the word 'all' implies that. Sibling context is clear.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for the 'category' parameter, including an enum. The description does not add additional meaning to the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so 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 the tool lists all available image format presets and what they include (dimensions and use cases). It is distinct from the sibling 'generate_blog_image' which likely generates an image. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings, missing a chance for clarity.

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 used to view available presets before generating an image, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use or not use it, nor any alternatives. The context of a single sibling suggests usage, but lacks direct instruction.

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