List images

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds the linkage to create_vm/reinstall_vm, but says nothing about result volume, whether the list is large, or how the 'available' set is scoped (region/tenant).

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and with the downstream-requirement note placed second. No filler, though the second sentence could be trimmed slightly.

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 filtered-list tool with 4 optional parameters, full schema coverage, and clear annotations, the description covers what an agent needs to select and call it. The absence of an output schema is acceptable because the return is a plain image list.

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% and the schema documents os, version, page, and pageSize thoroughly, including defaults and the max page size. The description only restates that filtering by OS and version is possible, adding no syntax or interaction detail beyond the schema.

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 gives a specific verb+resource (list operating system images) and pins the scope to VM creation with optional OS/version filtering. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the single-item siblings get_image and get_image_by_label, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

It supplies useful downstream context — image labels are required by create_vm and reinstall_vm — which implies when to call it. However, it never states when to use this instead of get_image/get_image_by_label, and gives no exclusions.

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