get_records_on_image

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds an auth requirement ('Requires an access token'), which is genuinely useful context, but says nothing about result size, ordering, or pagination for a list that could return dozens of records.

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-loads the core action in one sentence, then adds motivation via the manifest/census example. The example sentences are a little elaborate but earn their place by justifying the tool's existence.

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-param read tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description supplies purpose, inverse relationship, use cases, and auth requirement. Only pagination/result-size behavior is 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?

Only one parameter, image_ark, and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents its type and format ('3:1:33SQ-G5LD-93NY'). The description's 'one image' adds only a restatement of the input's role, not new syntax or constraints.

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 frames itself as the inverse of the sibling get_record_image. An agent can distinguish it from get_record 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 scenarios where this beats alternatives: recovering a whole household as a cluster, or verifying whether a target person was indexed from a page already in hand. It does not state explicit exclusions, but the positive guidance is clear and tied to sibling tools.

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