list_ad_images

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and scope, providing no information about pagination, filtering, required permissions, or return format. The verb 'List' implies read-only, but the tool's behavior is not disclosed beyond that.

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 a single sentence of 7 words, perfectly concise and front-loaded. Every word earns its place, with no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is far too minimal. It does not address pagination, filtering, required fields, or expected response structure, leaving substantial gaps for an agent trying to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The schema has 5 parameters and description coverage is 0%. The description does not mention any parameter, such as ad_account_id, limit, after, fields, or effective_status, leaving all semantics to the schema alone. This is a significant gap for a tool with multiple parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('ad images') with a clear scope ('for an ad account'). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_ads (ad images vs. ads) and get_ad_image (plural list vs. singular get).

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 phrase 'for an ad account' provides clear context on when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion scenarios, such as 'use get_ad_image for a single ad image' or 'use list_ad_creatives for creative assets.'

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