list_photos

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, requires permissions, filters by image type, or is recursive. The minimal description lacks critical behavioral context for safe invocation.

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 with only two sentences and an Args block. It front-loads the purpose and provides structured parameter details without any extraneous content.

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 has an output schema and only two simple parameters, the description is adequate but lacks completeness in terms of behavioral traits and edge cases (e.g., handling of subdirectories, image format filtering). It meets minimum viability.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning: 'directory' is explained as the directory to list from with a default phone camera folder, and 'limit' as maximum files to list. This goes slightly beyond the raw schema but could be richer (e.g., supported image formats).

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 'List photo files in a directory' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_directory (lists all files) and read_photo (reads a specific photo), though could further specify what file types constitute 'photo 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_directory or read_photo. There is no mention of preconditions, exclusions, or comparative advantages.

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