list_files

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

The description is consistent with annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false) but adds no extra behavioral context beyond stating the action. The annotations already convey safety, so the description provides minimal added value.

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 a single, clear sentence of six words with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and immediately communicates the tool's purpose.

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 simplicity of the tool and the existence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not clarify whether hidden files are included, recursion behavior, or sorting, leaving some uncertainty.

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 parameter workdir has 0% schema coverage, but the description mentions 'project work directory', implying the parameter is the directory path. This adds some meaning, but lacks details on format, defaults, or scope.

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 explicitly states the action 'List' and the resource 'files in a project work directory', which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on analysis or configuration tasks.

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 such as get_file or read_text_file. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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