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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds useful behavioral context about the limit parameter, truncation of large folders, and the response containing a note. It does not contradict annotations and enhances the agent's understanding of result size and handling.

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 long, with the primary purpose in the first sentence and essential usage details in the second. Every word adds value, and it is well-structured for quick comprehension.

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?

The tool is a simple read-only list operation with full schema coverage and an output schema. The description covers the key usage (listing, path resolution, limit/truncation) and is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly without needing extra details.

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?

Though schema coverage is 100%, the description adds value by explaining that valid paths come from onedrive_root, and clarifies the limit behavior (default/max, truncation). This goes beyond the bare schema descriptions and helps the agent select meaningful parameters.

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 ('Lists') and resource ('files and folders in a OneDrive path'), and distinguishes this tool from siblings like onedrive_search_files and onedrive_file_info by its focus on directory listing. It also provides a dependency pointer to onedrive_root, further clarifying its role.

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 clear context by instructing to use onedrive_root for valid paths and advising to narrow the path for large folders. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives for searching or file info, so it lacks a full when-not-to-use dimension.

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