list_media

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds real behavior beyond them: default page sizes, the 20-file drop page, the offset+limit ceiling of 1000, and the fact that the response signals whether all matching files were returned. It stops short of describing error or empty-result behavior, so not a 5.

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?

Five short sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and no filler. The paging and output-shape details are packed densely but earn their place; the last sentence is slightly overloaded with two ideas (completeness flag plus paging math).

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully covers return contents (filename, added time, completeness indicator) and paging. It leaves implicit whether non-drop media reachable by this tool beyond uploads, and no sort-order detail, but nothing critical to correct invocation is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema lacks: the offset+limit <= 1000 constraint and the drop-session context for drop_session_id. It doesn't explain limit/offset interaction with sorting exactly, so just above baseline.

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?

"List the newest media assets for the authenticated user" gives a specific verb, resource and ordering scope, and the second sentence carves out the drop-listing mode so an agent can tell it apart from upload_media / create_media_drop / create_signed_upload.

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?

It states the chained workflow explicitly ("After create_media_drop, pass drop_session_id to see files the human uploaded on /drop/<token>") and names the downstream consumers ("Use public_url with validate_post / create_post"). It also gives a paging rule of when to page vs not, which removes the main ambiguity an agent would have.

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