pixera_list_timelines_detailed

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that returned timelines include fps/transport mode and per-layer fields, and that protected timelines are marked, which is useful behavioral context. It does not discuss read-only nature or other operational traits beyond the name.

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 dense sentence that front-loads the timeline attributes and then lists per-layer fields. It is efficient and error-free, though somewhat telegraphic.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not fully explain return structure. However, for a detailed-list tool with a sibling basic-list tool, it should clarify the include_layers parameter and when to choose this variant over pixera_list_timelines; those gaps keep it at adequate.

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?

There is one optional parameter, include_layers, with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it. The phrase "per layer" weakly implies layer details are included, but the effect of setting include_layers to false is undocumented.

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 identifies the resource as timelines and enumerates the detailed fields returned: fps, transport mode, per-layer resource/model/home screen/scale mode. It does not name or distinguish the sibling pixera_list_timelines, and it lacks an explicit verb, so it falls short of 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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this detailed listing versus pixera_list_timelines or other siblings. Usage is only implied by the word "detailed" in the tool name.

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