list_assets

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It declares 'Read-only', explains each filter's behavior (true/false/omit), pagination defaults, and return format (total count, page, assets array with fields). This fully discloses behavioral traits.

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 with a clear 'Args' section and 'Returns' section. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy. It is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 tool's simplicity (6 optional params, pagination, no nested objects), the description fully covers input details, usage context, and return structure. Even though output schema exists, the description adds valuable return field names.

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 the description thoroughly explains all 6 parameters: is_favorite (true/false/omit), is_archived, is_trashed, asset_type (IMAGE/VIDEO), page (starting 1), size (1-200, default 50). This adds extensive meaning beyond the schema's bare type definitions.

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 'List assets with simple filters (no search query needed).' It specifies the verb (list) and resource (assets) with scope (filters by status/type). It distinguishes from siblings like search_metadata and search_smart by contrasting browsing versus specific search.

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 says 'Use this to browse the library by status (favorites, archived, trashed) or type. For finding specific content, use search_metadata (structured) or search_smart (visual AI).' This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use, naming specific alternatives.

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