image_list_tool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. 'List images' only states the action and resource, but does not mention that it is read-only, what data is returned, or any potential side effects. This falls short of the transparency expected for a tool with no annotation support.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence 'List images.' It is front-loaded and every word contributes to the core purpose. However, it omits mention of the optional filter capability, which could be considered helpful but not essential for 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?

The description is minimal and does not mention the filter functionality, which is a significant capability of the tool based on the schema. It also lacks context about when to prefer listing over inspecting images. The output schema covers return values, but the overall contextual guidance is incomplete for an agent to invoke this tool effectively.

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 description coverage is 100% and includes a detailed description and example for the 'filters' parameter. The tool description does not add any parameter-specific meaning, but the schema already sufficiently documents the parameter, so the 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 'List images' uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('images'), which unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like image_inspect_tool, image_pull_tool, and container_list_tool. It is the only tool for listing images, making its purpose immediately clear.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as image_inspect_tool for details or image_prune_tool for deletion. It does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or prefered scenarios, leaving the agent without usage direction.

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