create_album

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral burden. It mentions the side effect of creating an album in Immich but does not disclose potential errors (e.g., duplicate names), permissions required, or whether the operation is reversible. For a creation tool, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 concise (4 sentences) and includes a structured parameter breakdown. However, the parameter list could be integrated more seamlessly into the main description to be more front-loaded. No unnecessary words but slightly fragmented.

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 the simple nature of the tool (create album with optional fields and pre-population), the description covers the main use case and return values. It lacks details on error handling or constraints (e.g., name uniqueness) but is sufficient for a basic creation operation. Siblings provide contrast.

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 0%, so the description fully compensates. It provides clear semantics for each parameter: name with an example format, description as optional text, asset_ids as optional list of UUIDs. It also explains the return value structure (id, name, asset count), which is not in the schema.

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 tool creates a new album, optionally pre-populated with assets, distinguishing it from siblings like add_assets_to_album (adds to existing) or update_album. The verb 'create' and resource 'album' are specific and 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 explicitly notes using the tool to organize photos into collections and mentions optional pre-population. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it (e.g., for adding assets to an existing album, use add_assets_to_album) or alternatives. Still, the context is clear enough for an AI agent to infer basic usage.

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