get_album_images

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

With no annotations, the description carries the safety burden; it states 'Read-only' and describes return type and size/limit behavior. It doesn't document error handling or output structure details, so while transparent, it isn't exhaustive.

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?

Purpose, usage-routing, read-only safety, args, and return are all covered in a compact, front-loaded layout. No filler sentences; the Args list is scannable.

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?

Complete enough to invoke correctly without opening sibling definitions or schemas: it identifies the album resource, optional parameters with defaults, output type, and the key alternative. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by the Returns line.

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 0%, but description documents all three parameters: album_id as UUID, size values with pixel dimensions and default, and limit range 1-50 with default. This fully compensates for the bare 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?

States a specific verb ('Get'), a clear resource ('an album'), and a concrete output type ('image blocks for inline visual display'). It also names the sibling alternative get_album_thumbnails, making the distinction explicit.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this to visually browse an album in clients that render images' and directs to get_album_thumbnails for HTML gallery generation with base64 data URIs. This gives an agent a clear decision rule rather than relying on tool names.

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