pixels_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List all pixels' but does not mention pagination, the effect of the 'limit' parameter, or that 'all' may be capped by the default limit. This is a notable transparency gap.

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 with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it highly scannable.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, and the description does not mention what fields are returned, pagination behavior, or how it differs from other pixel tools. The claim of 'all pixels' conflicts with the existence of a limit parameter, leaving the agent with an incomplete picture.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for both parameters. It clarifies that account_id is used to filter pixels by ad account, but it does not explain the 'limit' parameter or that it controls pagination/max results. The semantics of 'limit' are left to the agent's inference.

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 'List' and the resource 'pixels (datasets)' owned by an ad account. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pixels_get (likely fetches a single pixel) by emphasizing the plural 'all pixels' and the ownership scope.

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 use for listing all pixels for a given ad account, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. With many sibling pixel tools (e.g., pixels_get, pixels_get_stats), explicit exclusions would be helpful, but the core usage is still clear from context.

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