List Image Category IDs That Contain Images

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by specifying the output is a paginated JSON array, that pagination metadata is included, and how to control pagination (page, per_page). It also references filtering capabilities. No contradictions.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose. It includes a useful link to filtering docs but could be more concise. Overall, it balances detail and brevity well.

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?

Despite good schema and annotation coverage, the description contains a critical internal contradiction: it says 'Return an array of Image Category IDs' but later says 'Returns a paginated JSON array of Photos.' This inconsistency undermines completeness. Additionally, no output schema is provided, so the description should be precise about the return structure.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description notes that project_id is required and mentions page/per_page for pagination, but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. 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 clearly states it returns an array of Image Category IDs that contain images for a specified project. It specifies a specific verb ('Return'), resource ('Image Category IDs'), and condition ('that contain Images'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_image_categories.

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 clear context on when to use the tool: for enumerating photos with pagination, finding IDs, or filtering by query parameters. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, but the usage context is well-defined.

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