gallery_get_albums

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

With readOnlyHint=true in annotations, the safety profile is already known. The description adds the open-project requirement and specifies that it returns all album names as strings, which is useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. 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 two concise sentences with the primary action front-loaded. Both sentences add value: the first states what the tool does, the second clarifies output format and a prerequisite. 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?

This is a simple parameterless read-only listing tool. The description covers purpose, output, and a prerequisite. Since an output schema exists, return values do not need detailed explanation. The description is complete for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter meanings. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds relevant output context without being redundant.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('still albums in the Gallery'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like gallery_get_stills or gallery_create_album. The added sentence 'Returns album names as strings' further specifies the output type.

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 states a prerequisite ('Requires an open project'), which gives some usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives such as gallery_get_current_album or gallery_get_powergrade_albums, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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