List media

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

The annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description need not restate that it is read-only. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond what the schema and annotations convey, such as return format or pagination defaults. It does not contradict the annotations and provides a baseline level of transparency.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('List items in the media library') and then lists the key capabilities. There is zero wasted wording, and it is easy to scan. This is exemplary conciseness.

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 read-only list operation with a fully described schema and safety annotations, the description is mostly complete. It omits explicit return format and does not differentiate from siblings, but those are minor gaps because the purpose is clear and the schema covers all parameter behavior. It is adequate for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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?

All 13 parameters have schema descriptions with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description does mention 'search, type filtering, date filtering and pagination', which groups some parameters, but it does not add any meaning beyond what the schema already states for each parameter. No additional semantic value is provided.

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'), the resource ('items in the media library'), and key capabilities (search, type filtering, date filtering, pagination). It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like list_content (content library) and get_media (single item), so an agent can tell what it does without inspecting the schema.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention get_media for single-item retrieval or list_content for posts, nor does it state any contexts where this tool is preferred. The only context is implied by the name and purpose, but no explicit usage direction is provided.

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