image_registry_data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, so the description adds context beyond these: it uses the daemon and its cached credentials, resolves remote descriptor and platform list, and warns about auth_config logging. This adds useful behavioral detail without contradicting annotations.

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 well-structured with a clear first sentence, followed by additional details and a security note. It also includes argument definitions. While effective, it could be slightly more concise by merging the args list with the narrative.

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 two parameters, zero schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's operation, parameter semantics, return type ('dict - Registry data attrs'), and security considerations. It could be more detailed about the return shape, but is generally complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explicitly listing parameters: 'repository - Image reference' and 'auth_config - Optional registry authentication config'. This provides meaning beyond the raw schema, though lacks format examples or constraints.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'registry data for an image without pulling it'. It distinguishes from sibling tool 'registry_manifest' by specifying when to use each: 'For direct registry access without a daemon use registry_manifest.'

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Get registry data for an image without pulling it, via the daemon's distribution endpoint.' And when not to: 'For direct registry access without a daemon use registry_manifest.' Also provides security guidance on preferred credential handling.

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