List Visuals

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral details: pagination, slim response fields, filterCount inclusion, and auto-resolution of pageId when one page exists. No contradictions.

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 appropriately sized with five concise sentences, each adding essential information. The purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence earns its place without 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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, pagination, filtering), the description fully covers usage scenarios and integration with other tools. The output schema handles return value details, so the description does not need to repeat them.

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?

With 80% schema description coverage, the description adds significant value: it explains slim behavior beyond the schema, reiterates and contextualizes limit/offset, describes pageId auto-resolution, and details visualType filtering before pagination affecting total count.

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 lists visuals on a page and is paginated. It uses a specific verb-resource combination and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'pbir_get_visual' (single visual) and 'pbir_add_visual' by focusing on listing and pagination.

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 explicit guidance on pagination with limit/offset, filtering by visualType, and combining with 'pbir_list_pages' for cross-page sweeps. It also explains the slim parameter behavior, offering clear usage context and alternatives.

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