Retrieve unique paths

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds the Immich operation mapping (GET /view/folder/unique-paths) and tag, which could aid debugging but doesn't disclose return shape or pagination behavior. Baseline level for annotations-covered read operation.

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 first line repeats the title verbatim ('Retrieve unique paths') before the substance. Minor redundancy, otherwise efficient.

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 output schema, the description should ideally hint at the return value (array of path strings). It states 'a list of unique folder paths' which gives the shape conceptually, but doesn't say format (e.g., array of strings) or whether paths are absolute. Adequate but minimal.

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?

Zero parameters, so per rubric baseline is 4. No parameter semantics are needed, 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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Retrieve a list of unique folder paths from asset original paths.' This is clear and distinguishable from most siblings, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with the closely related 'immich_get_assets_by_original_path' or 'immich_search_asset_files'.

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 implies this is for listing distinct folder paths but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. For a read-only discovery endpoint with a related sibling (get_assets_by_original_path), a note on when to prefer this would help.

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