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

The annotations already mark the operation as read-only and non-destructive, and the description adds valuable behavioral context: it is free, returns records only, never starts anything, and is scoped to the caller's own account. There is no contradiction with the annotations.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: what is listed, how to use the results, and the side-effect/safety note. The key scoping detail is front-loaded.

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 read-only list tool with optional filters and no output schema, the description is complete enough: it covers scope, ordering, side-effect absence, and how to consume the returned task ids/URLs with downstream tools. The annotations cover the safety profile, so nothing essential is missing.

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?

The input schema has descriptions for limit and query, but type and status are only bare enums. The description partially compensates by clarifying the content is image and video generations and that results are newest first, but it does not explain the type/status filter semantics or parameter combinations beyond what the schema already offers.

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 states a specific verb and resource: listing the caller's own recent image and video generations, newest first, including website-made generations. This scope distinguishes it clearly from siblings like check_generation, edit_image, and generate_video.

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 explicitly says when to use it: to find an earlier result to show again, edit, or animate. It also routes the agent to the correct next tools by mentioning task ids with check_generation and URLs with edit_image / generate_video.

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