list_images

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly implies a read-only listing operation ('List all...') and mentions the output format options, but doesn't provide extra context like permissions, potential volume of results, or absence of side effects. This is adequate for a simple list tool but not rich.

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 compact, containing only two sentences. It front-loads the core action and resource, then provides the optional parameter detail without any wasted words.

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 that this is a simple list tool with one optional parameter and full schema coverage, the description provides sufficient context to select and invoke it correctly. The mention of 'table' and 'json' formats covers the return representation adequately, compensating for the lack of an output schema.

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 schema already fully documents the only parameter with its enum, default, and description. The description reiterates the 'format' parameter and its values, adding minimal new meaning. Since schema description coverage is 100%, a baseline score of 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 starts with a specific verb phrase 'List all WSL container images', making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_containers and volume_list by naming the exact resource type (WSL container images).

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 explicitly mentions the optional 'format' parameter and its allowed values, giving clear guidance on output control. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the resource type in the description makes selection unambiguous among list_* siblings.

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