list_assets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds only the weak temporal qualifier 'added so far', which does not clarify scope, ordering, or whether results are per-session or per-kit.

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?

It is a single short phrase with no waste, but that brevity comes from under-specification rather than discipline. There is no front-loaded statement of action for an agent to anchor on.

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 return values need not be explained. However, for a listing tool sitting among nine siblings, the description omits what an 'asset' is, the scope of the listing, and any relationship to kits or templates, leaving the agent unable to place it confidently.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. No param-level value could be added here.

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 phrase 'The pictures added so far' is a noun fragment, not a verb+resource statement, so it never says what the tool does. It loosely hints that assets are images accumulated in the session, but 'pictures' does not even match the tool's own 'assets' terminology, and nothing distinguishes it from siblings like get_template or preview_kit.

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?

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative named anywhere. An agent cannot tell from this fragment whether to call list_assets, get_template, or preview_kit to inspect current state.

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