get_records_on_image

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the access-token requirement and the expected result size (thirty to forty records per page), which helps an agent anticipate a bulk list rather than a single record.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and the reverse-of relationship, and the auth note is placed last. The middle paragraph's manifest/census illustration earns its place by explaining why a bulk list is useful, though it is slightly more verbose than strictly needed.

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 single-parameter, read-only list tool with no output schema and annotations already covering safety, the description covers what it returns, the auth prerequisite, and the practical use cases. An agent has enough to invoke it correctly; only formal exclusions for when not to use it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single parameter (image_ark) is fully documented with an example in the schema. The description only restates 'one image' and adds no syntax or format detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('List every record indexed from one image') and explicitly positions itself as the reverse of the sibling get_record_image, so an agent can distinguish the two directions of the image/record relationship without opening either schema.

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?

Gives concrete when-to-use scenarios: picking up a whole household from a page, or verifying whether a person was indexed at all. It does not state when NOT to use it or name an alternative for single-record lookup, so it falls short of the full 5.

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