update_album

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions a side effect ('modifies album metadata in Immich') and describes parameter behavior ('Leave empty to keep current name/description'). It could disclose more about authorization or reversibility, but the provided context is adequate.

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 lines plus Args and Returns sections) and front-loaded with the purpose. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is clear.

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 (3 params, 1 required) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and parameter details. It could mention error scenarios or additional effects, but it is complete enough for correct invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates fully by explaining each parameter: album_id as 'The album's UUID,' name and description with 'Leave empty to keep current.' This adds critical meaning absent from 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 'Update an album's name or description' and 'Use this to rename or re-describe an existing album,' providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_album and delete_album.

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 rename or re-describe an existing album,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool mentions, but the context is sufficient for this straightforward tool.

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