Create photo album

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

With only destructiveHint=false provided, the description carries most of the burden and does so well: it discloses that the album is created empty, that it is placed at /albums/<name>, and that the call fails if the name already exists. It stops short of mentioning auth requirements or what the response contains.

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?

Two short sentences, zero waste, with the core action and the name-not-path constraint front-loaded before the edge case. Every clause earns its place.

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?

For a one-parameter, no-output-schema tool this covers the essential facts: what is created, where, and the failure mode. Minor gaps (auth context, duplicate-name alternatives like opening the existing album) remain but are not critical.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine meaning with 'Pass the name, not a path', clarifying that the value is a bare label rather than a location. That is a real disambiguation the schema alone does not make.

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 and resource ('Create an empty Proton Photos album'), which clearly separates it from photos_list_albums and photos_delete_album. It does not explicitly name a sibling to disambiguate against, which keeps it at 4 rather than 5.

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 implied by 'create an empty album' and by the failure condition, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or reference to alternatives such as photos_update_album for modifying an existing album. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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