list_vdi_images

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The '[READ]' prefix merely restates that, and the description adds only the nature of the returned catalog — it says nothing about openWorldHint behavior, result size, or pagination.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the qualifying context tucked into a parenthetical rather than padding the prose. Nothing is wasted.

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, zero-required-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description conveys what is returned and why it matters. Only minor details (pagination, result size, whether snapshots require base_vm_id) are left unstated.

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% and both optional parameters (target, base_vm_id) are documented there, including the default-target behavior and the snapshot-scoping effect. The description adds no parameter detail, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific verb ('List') and resource ('instant-clone base VMs and snapshots'), then defines the resource in domain terms ('golden-image catalog') so an agent understands what 'images' actually means. It also ties itself to the sibling that consumes the output (push_desktop_pool_image), which no other sibling does.

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 parenthetical 'catalog for push_desktop_pool_image' gives clear context for when this tool is relevant — browsing available base VMs/snapshots before pushing an image. It stops short of explicit when-not or alternative-tool guidance, but the usage context is unambiguous.

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