get_selected_photos

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

It discloses the fallback behavior (filmstrip if none selected), which is a key behavioral trait. But it does not mention that it is a read-only operation, nor does it explain pagination behavior or the nature of the output. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and this is only partially met.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence that captures the core action and fallback with zero waste. It is appropriately concise.

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?

The description covers the main purpose and fallback, but omits parameter semantics entirely and does not describe return behavior (though an output schema exists). For a tool with two optional parameters, the lack of parameter documentation makes it incomplete for an agent to call 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?

The description does not mention the limit or offset parameters at all. The input schema provides only types and defaults, with no descriptions, and schema description coverage is 0%. Thus, the agent has no guidance on how to use these parameters, a significant gap that the description fails to compensate for.

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 states the specific action ('Get'), the resource ('currently selected photos'), and the context ('in Lightroom Classic'), along with a fallback behavior (filmstrip if none selected). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like lightroom_search_photos or lightroom_get_photo_metadata.

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 clearly implies usage for the current selection, which is distinct from searching or metadata retrieval. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it lacks explicit routing guidance.

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