retrieve_image_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the underlying endpoint (GET /v1/compute/images) and scope (standard + custom images), but says nothing about pagination behavior, default ordering, or return shape for a tool with page/size/orderBy params.

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 list action and resource. The endpoint annotation is useful context, though the first sentence closely mirrors the title and 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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and strong annotations, the description covers purpose, scope, and endpoint. It does not explain pagination defaults or return contents, but no output schema exists and the schema carries parameter semantics, so it is largely 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all eight parameters are already documented in the schema. The description mentions filtering generally but does not add syntax or behavioral detail beyond the schema (e.g., how search interacts with name, or orderBy formatting). Baseline 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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('images'), and clarifies that both standard Contabo images and uploaded custom images are returned. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not differentiate itself from close siblings such as retrieve_image (singular) or retrieve_custom_images_stats.

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 explains what is listed and that filtering is possible, but gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over retrieve_image for a single image or retrieve_custom_images_stats for aggregate statistics. No alternatives or exclusions are named.

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