aula_get_gallery

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It does convey a key trait: it does not return actual image data, only URLs. However, it omits details like authentication requirements, pagination behavior, or any side effects. This is moderate disclosure for a read-only fetch tool.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose and critical limitation. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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 tool is simple with no output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain return values. It states 'album metadata and media URLs' but 'album metadata' is vague, lacking fields or structure. Given the low complexity, the description is minimally complete but leaves room for clarification about the metadata contents.

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%, with all three parameters having descriptions. The description itself adds no parameter-specific information, so it barely benefits above the schema baseline. It implicitly references time range via 'recent' but does not detail the parameters.

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 retrieves recent photo albums and media, and explicitly notes it returns metadata and URLs, not actual images. This specific verb+resource statement distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_posts or get_messages.

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 (use when you need gallery/media information), but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or which alternative to prefer for actual image downloads. The note about returning URLs instead of images hints at using other tools, but no sibling tool is named.

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