list_generated_images

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

With no annotations, the description discloses it reads from a specific directory and returns filename, date, and prompt. It is a read-only operation, but could mention any potential side effects or permissions, though for a list tool this is sufficient.

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, with a clear purpose sentence followed by a directory note, return fields, and an args list. Every sentence adds value, and the format is easy to parse.

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 existence of an output schema (implied by context), the description's mention of return fields is sufficient. It also specifies ordering (newest first). Could mention edge cases like an empty directory, but overall complete for a simple list tool.

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 description adds full meaning to the only parameter 'limit', explaining it controls the maximum number of images returned (default 20, newest first). This is valuable beyond the schema which only has type and default.

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 'list' and resource 'generated images in the PKM', and specifies the directory path and return fields. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'generate_image' (creation) and 'list_folder' (generic listing).

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 implies usage for viewing recently generated images, and the context of siblings makes it clear when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, leaving some room for improvement.

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