gallery_get_powergrade_albums

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

With the readOnlyHint annotation already covering the read-only nature, the description adds meaningful context: the persistence of grades across projects and the caveat about availability in all Resolve versions. These are behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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 concise sentences: the first states the primary action, the second gives domain context, and the third provides an important caveat. 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?

For a simple parameterless read-only tool with an output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, domain meaning, and availability, which is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 need not explain any. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description adds no parameter-specific info, which is acceptable.

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 explicitly states 'List the names of all PowerGrade albums in the Gallery,' using a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like gallery_get_albums by specifying 'PowerGrade albums', which is a distinct category.

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 context about PowerGrade albums ('contain grades that persist across projects') and warns about version availability. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like gallery_get_albums or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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