list_assets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it delivers: it declares 'Read-only', documents the tri-state behavior of favorite/archived flags, and exposes the Immich-specific quirk that trashed items and active library items are never mixed. This goes well beyond a bare action statement, though it could add more detail on filter interactions.

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 purpose is stated first, followed by a compact Args block that earns its place. Every sentence conveys operational value, and there is no repetition of schema defaults that are already visible.

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 operation, filters, pagination, and a summary of return fields. An agent has enough to invoke list_assets correctly and interpret the result, especially given the output schema is also provided. No critical guidance is missing.

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%, so the description must compensate fully, and it does. Every one of the six parameters is explained with accepted values, defaults, and omission behavior. This makes the tool callable without needing to infer anything from ambiguous schema titles.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List assets with simple filters', and clarifies it is for browsing, not search. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from search_metadata and search_smart, so an agent can tell siblings apart at a glance.

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 states exactly when to use this tool ('browse the library by status or type') and names the alternatives for finding specific content ('search_metadata (structured) or search_smart (visual AI)'). This is explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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