List the images the chatbot can show

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds value by stating the output includes descriptions for relevance, which is useful context. However, it doesn't mention pagination, ordering, or response structure. The added context is modest.

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 action and resource, then adds the key qualifier about relevance descriptions. There is zero waste; every word contributes.

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?

For a simple read-only list with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description conveys the core purpose and what is returned (images with relevance descriptions). It doesn't specify pagination or limits, but that is not critical for a basic list operation. The tool is simple enough that this description is sufficiently complete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% – the only parameter (website_id) is fully described in the schema, including its source and default behavior. The tool description adds nothing about parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action (list) and resource (images) with a specific scope ('the chatbot may show a visitor'). It also mentions the output includes relevance descriptions. It distinguishes from siblings like add_image/delete_image by the verb, though it doesn't explicitly name them. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: to retrieve images the chatbot can show. It implies usage for reviewing available images but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. This is adequate for a simple read-only list.

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