ibmcloud_cr_images

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. The verb 'List' suggests a read-only operation, but the description gives no additional behavioral details such as pagination, default filters, authentication requirements, or whether IBM images are included by default. It discloses very little about the tool's actual behavior.

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 extremely concise: 'List container images'. It is front-loaded, contains zero waste, and every word contributes meaning. It is appropriately sized for such a simple tool.

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 (two optional parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally viable. It clearly identifies the action, and the schema covers parameter meanings. However, it does not mention the IBM Cloud context, expected return format, or any prerequisites like login, leaving some gaps for an agent relying solely on this description.

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 already describes both parameters with 100% coverage ('Filter by repository' and 'Include IBM images'). The description adds no extra parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate. There is no need for the description to compensate for schema gaps.

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's purpose: to list container images. It uses a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('container images'), and it is distinct from sibling tools like ibmcloud_cr_image_rm (removes images) and ibmcloud_cr_namespaces (lists namespaces).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tools. The usage context is only implied by the basic action of listing images.

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