bookstack_images_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions pagination and filtering but doesn't describe important behaviors: whether this is a read-only operation, what authentication is required, rate limits, error conditions, or what the output format looks like. For a list tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word contributes meaning, though it could be slightly more specific by mentioning 'BookStack gallery images' rather than just 'gallery'.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with 4 parameters and filtering capabilities. It doesn't explain what information is returned about each image, how pagination works in practice, or any behavioral constraints. The agent would need to guess about the response format and operational details.

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 schema already fully documents all 4 parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning 'pagination and filtering options' which aligns with the count/offset and filter parameters, but doesn't provide additional semantic context about how these work together or practical usage examples.

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 clearly states the action ('List all images in the gallery') and resource ('images'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'bookstack_attachments_list' or 'bookstack_images_read', which would require mentioning it's specifically for gallery images with pagination/filtering capabilities.

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 mentions 'pagination and filtering options' which implies when to use this tool (for browsing/searching images), but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like 'bookstack_search' or 'bookstack_images_read'. No prerequisites, exclusions, or comparison to sibling tools are stated.

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