images

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It does disclose two useful traits: 'including offscreen photos' and 'edits remain restricted to registered copies', but it never states that create_candidate mutates state, what prepare_* actions do, whether anything is persisted, or what permissions are needed.

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?

Four short sentences with the primary action front-loaded, so it is compact. However it references 'next_offset', which is not an actual parameter name (the schema has 'offset'), making a key instruction ambiguous.

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 11-parameter, seven-action tool with no annotations and zero schema descriptions needs substantially more explanation. The output schema covers return values, but action-specific prerequisites, argument requirements, and side effects for most actions are 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?

With 0% schema description coverage across 11 parameters, the description must compensate and does so for only a few: variant_uuid, collection_token, offset, and partially scope ('filtered collection'). tool, limit, target, variant_id, request_id, and observation_token are entirely undocumented anywhere.

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 first sentence clearly states 'list the active native collection' and 'select by variant_uuid', but the tool exposes seven actions and the description accounts for only list/select/next/previous/create_candidate. prepare_adjustments and prepare_tool, plus the tool and scope parameters, are never explained, and nothing distinguishes this tool from siblings like adjust or operations.

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 gives sequencing advice for pagination ('follow next_offset with the same collection_token') and what next/previous traverse, which is useful. But it never says when to choose this tool over adjust, read, or preview, and offers no when-not guidance for any action.

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