Список ссылок на скачивание образа

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

Annotation Contradiction: The description says 'Возвращает список' (returns a list), implying a read-only operation. However, the annotation readOnlyHint=false indicates the tool is not read-only, which contradicts the stated behavior. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., side effects, link expiration) are disclosed.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured: two sentences, with the primary purpose stated first and the use case in the second sentence. No wasted words.

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?

The description gives the essential context (purpose and use case) and the schema covers parameter details. However, it does not describe the response format, and with no output schema, some information about the returned links (e.g., structure, temporary nature) would be helpful. The contradiction with readOnlyHint also reduces completeness.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what is already in the schema. It only refers to 'конкретного образа' (specific image), but the schema already documents image_id, limit, and offset.

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 description clearly states the tool returns a list of all download links for a specific image ('Возвращает список всех ссылок на скачивание конкретного образа'). It uses a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like get_image_download and create_image_download by focusing on listing.

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?

The description provides clear usage context: it is used when migrating an image to external storage (Timeweb, Google Drive, Yandex.Disk). This gives the agent specific guidance on when to invoke the tool, though it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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