List shared albums

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful context beyond those annotations: the app-only scope, the inclusion of share links, and the API limitation that user-created Google Photos albums are invisible as of 2025-04-01.

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 sentences with no fluff. The core function is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the critical scope limitation is stated concisely in the second. Every sentence earns its place.

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, idempotent list tool with zero required parameters and a fully documented schema, the description covers everything an agent needs to invoke it correctly: what it returns, what scope it operates under, and an important API constraint. The lack of an output schema is not a serious gap because the description explicitly mentions share links and the pagination parameter is already documented.

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 parameters limit, account, and page_token are already fully documented in the schema. The description does not add parameter-specific guidance, which is acceptable because the baseline for full schema coverage is 3 and no extra semantic burden is placed on the description.

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 a specific resource ('shared albums this app created'), and clearly states the result includes share links. It also distinguishes itself from general album listing by explicitly excluding albums the user created directly in Google Photos, preventing confusion with sibling tools like list_albums.

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 gives clear context about when this tool applies: only albums created by this app are listed, and user-created Google Photos albums are not visible. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool, but the scope constraint effectively tells an agent when not to rely on this tool.

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