image_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not state the return shape (image references? IDs?), ordering, or whether the document context is required. For a tool with zero annotation coverage this is a notable gap.

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 front-loaded sentence with no redundant text, so every word earns its place. It is arguably too terse given the unstated return behavior, but structurally it is clean.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and only half the parameters documented, the description should say more about what a 'placed image' entry contains and how the document context is resolved. As written, an agent lacks enough information to anticipate the result.

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 coverage is 50%: document_id is documented in the schema, while pageIndex has no description. The phrase 'in a page' loosely ties the listing to the pageIndex parameter, but adds no format or indexing detail beyond that, so it only partially compensates for the documented gap.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List all placed images') and scopes it to a page, which is clear enough to distinguish from siblings like image_place or image_adjust. It does not, however, distinguish itself from image_info, image_getLinks, or resources_listLinks, which an agent might reasonably confuse it with.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as image_info, image_getLinks, or resources_listLinks. No prerequisites or exclusions are given, leaving the agent to infer usage entirely from the name.

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