immich-mcp

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, indicating safe, repeatable operations. The description adds value by specifying the return includes 'full metadata needed for deletion decisions' (e.g., file format, size, resolution), which clarifies the output's purpose beyond just listing groups.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by specific return details. Every sentence adds essential information without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured.

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 the tool's complexity (listing duplicates with metadata), annotations cover safety, and the description explains the output's utility for deletion decisions. However, without an output schema, it could benefit from more detail on return structure, but it's largely complete for its purpose.

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%, with the parameter 'analyze' well-documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific details, so it meets the baseline of 3 by not compensating for gaps but not adding extra value either.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'duplicate asset groups detected by Immich', specifying they contain 'assets with matching content hashes'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like immich.duplicates.delete and immich.duplicates.dismiss by focusing on listing rather than modifying duplicates.

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 for 'deletion decisions' by providing metadata, suggesting it's a preparatory step before actions like deletion. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, such as immich.assets.list for general asset listing.

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