image_list

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 covered. The description adds the [READ] prefix and the catalog purpose, but does not disclose return format, pagination, or authorization details. It is consistent with annotations, with no contradiction.

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 extremely concise: one purpose line and a two-line Args block. Every sentence earns its place, and the [READ] prefix provides immediate orientation. No wasted words.

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 simple listing tool with two optional params and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter behavior. It lacks explicit return structure, but the entity type is clear. Given the annotations cover safety and the tool is simple, this is nearly complete.

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 0%, but the description thoroughly compensates by documenting each parameter: base_vm_id for scoping snapshots, and target as the config.yaml horizon target with a default. This adds meaning well beyond the bare schema definitions.

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 it lists instant-clone base VMs and snapshots, with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself by referencing the golden-image catalog for pool_push_image, setting it apart from sibling list tools like machine_list or pool_list.

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 usage context by calling it the catalog for pool_push_image, and explains how to scope via base_vm_id and target. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling list tools or mention when not to use it, so it lacks formal exclusion guidance.

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