import_batch

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds meaningful context: the tool returns the count of newly-imported photos, and requires darktable to be running with the darktable-mcp Lua plugin installed. However, it does not disclose side effects such as how existing film rolls or duplicates are handled, or whether files are referenced in place or copied.

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?

Four sentences, tightly packed and front-loaded with the core purpose before usage context, return value, and prerequisite. Every sentence earns its place; there is no redundancy or filler.

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 2-parameter tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers the essentials: purpose, when to use it, the return value (count), and a key prerequisite (running darktable with the Lua plugin). Minor gaps like duplicate handling and explicit side effects keep it from a 5.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters (source_path, recursive) with descriptions and defaults. The description reinforces the path semantics ('folder of photos') but adds no new parameter-level detail. 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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Register a folder as a film roll in the user's darktable library.' This clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from the sibling import_from_camera by specifying a local-folder source ('copied photos from a card or external drive') rather than camera import.

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 gives a clear when-to-use scenario: 'Useful when you've copied photos from a card or external drive and want darktable to know about them.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or provide exclusions, but the stated context is sufficient for an agent to select this tool over import_from_camera in most cases.

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