immich_list_albums

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'List' implies a non-destructive read, but it says nothing about defaults (are shared/private albums both returned?), authentication requirements, pagination, or result ordering. It also does not disclose whether the asset counts are exact or approximate.

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?

A single six-word sentence that front-loads the action and resource with zero filler. Nothing is redundant or buried.

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, one-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema and full schema coverage, the description is minimally sufficient. It nonetheless omits the meaning of the default listing scope and pagination behavior, which an agent would need to call it confidently.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the single 'shared' boolean is already fully documented in the schema ('Filter shared albums only'). The description adds nothing about it, which is acceptable given the schema does the work, but there is no clarification of the default behavior when the flag is omitted.

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 ('List all albums') and adds the scope detail that asset counts are included. It distinguishes itself implicitly from singletons like immich_get_album and writers like immich_create_album via the plural 'list' naming, but does not explicitly name a sibling or clarify what it is not.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no pointer to alternatives such as immich_get_album for a single album or immich_search_smart for filtered discovery. The one available filter ('shared') is never mentioned in the description, so an agent gets no routing help.

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