iaas_get_images

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world, so safety is covered. The description usefully clarifies that results are limited to ImageProfile-defined images, but adds nothing about pagination, result size, or filtering behavior for a list endpoint that could return many 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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and immediately followed by the disambiguation. The trailing raw path 'GET /iaas/api/images' duplicates the annotation title and earns little.

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 read-only list tool with a single optional parameter and no output schema, the definition covers what the agent needs: what is returned conceptually and which alternative to use. Only pagination/response-shape behavior is unstated, which is a minor gap given no output schema exists.

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 optional parameter (apiVersion) and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents it. The description adds no semantics about version selection or defaults, which is the baseline expectation when the schema does the work.

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 ('Get all images defined in ImageProfile') and scopes the result set to ImageProfile-defined images rather than all images. It differentiates from the Fabric Image endpoint, though it names that endpoint descriptively rather than by sibling tool name (iaas_get_fabric_images). The leading 'Get images' line is a mild restatement of the name.

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?

Provides one explicit routing rule: use the Fabric Image endpoint for enumerated images. It says nothing about when to prefer this over iaas_get_image_profiles or iaas_get_image_profile, which are the closest siblings and the likeliest confusion point.

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