List media

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond restating the title: no default page size, no ordering, no statement of what the open-world read actually touches. With annotations carrying the load, this earns only partial credit for the absent behavioral detail.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with zero waste, which is structurally sound. The brevity is under-specification rather than efficiency, so it does not earn a top score for conciseness when the content is this thin.

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?

With three optional parameters, no output schema, and no description of return shape, defaults, or pagination behavior, an agent cannot call this confidently without trial and error. Annotations cover safety but not the operational detail a list tool needs.

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 0% across three parameters. The description does not mention the type filter, the limit cap of 100, the default page size, or that offset is a zero-based page cursor. The enum on 'type' is the only self-documenting element, leaving limit and offset semantics undefined.

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?

"List uploaded media" gives a clear verb and resource, so the basic action is unambiguous. But it never distinguishes itself from siblings like get_media, list_posts, or list_clips, nor does it state what 'media' covers or whether results are scoped to an account. That is minimum viable, not a distinguishing definition.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use list_media versus get_media (single item) or how to page through results with limit/offset. The agent must infer the list-vs-get relationship and pagination strategy entirely from tool names.

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