list_images

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full load; 'List stored images' implies a non-destructive read, which is useful. It discloses the returned attributes but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or limits for a potentially large collection.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, containing the scope and return fields with no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so the field list need not be the description's job, and with one optional parameter the surface area is small. Ordering and volume behavior are the only real gaps.

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% for the single 'profile' parameter, so the description must compensate. '(all profiles, or one)' explains that omitting or nulling the parameter returns everything, which the schema's bare anyOf/string/null does not convey; only the expected identifier format is left unspecified.

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 (List) and resource (stored images), and adds scope (all profiles, or one) plus the returned fields. An agent can separate it from render_image and delete_image, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: the tool exists to enumerate images, and the parenthetical hints at the optional profile filter. There is no statement of when to prefer this over render_image or list_profiles, and no prerequisites are given.

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