List Directory with Sizes

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds behavioral context by mentioning the [FILE] and [DIR] prefixes and the allowed directories constraint. No contradictions; it aligns with the read-only nature.

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 three sentences, all essential. It front-loads the main action and follows with useful details. No wasted words.

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 output schema exists and the annotations provide read-only context, the description covers purpose, usage constraints, and output format. It is sufficiently complete for a tool of this complexity.

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 schema covers only 50% of parameters (sortBy has a description, path does not). The description adds no parameter-level details beyond the schema, only stating 'in a specified path.' It does not compensate for the low coverage.

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 tool's action: 'Get a detailed listing of all files and directories in a specified path, including sizes.' It also highlights the distinguishing feature of [FILE] and [DIR] prefixes, which differentiates it from the sibling tool 'move_file'.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: 'useful for understanding directory structure and finding specific files within a directory.' It also adds a constraint: 'Only works within allowed directories.' However, it does not explicitly compare with the sibling tool or specify when not to use it.

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