Retrieve album statistics

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 fully covered by structured data. The description adds only the scoping detail that results are limited to the authenticated user's albums, and says nothing about what the statistics contain (counts, sizes, date ranges) or whether pagination applies.

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?

Short and front-loaded, but the opening sentence merely restates the title and is immediately followed by a sentence saying the same thing again, and the trailing 'Immich operation / tag' metadata is provenance rather than agent-facing guidance.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description should carry the burden of explaining what 'statistics' means, since there is no return-value documentation anywhere. As written, the agent knows it returns 'statistics about albums' but not which metrics, leaving a real gap.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. There is nothing for the description to disambiguate, and the schema is trivially complete.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Retrieve album statistics') with a scoping clause ('about the albums available to the authenticated user'), so the agent knows this is a per-user album aggregate, not a global one. It does not, however, differentiate itself from close siblings such as immich_get_album_info, immich_get_all_albums, or the other *statistics tools (asset, library, person), which an agent must disambiguate on its own.

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 no when-to-use guidance, no preconditions, and names no alternative. With many sibling statistics/info tools present, an agent gets no signal about why it should pick this one over immich_get_album_info or immich_get_library_statistics.

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