List Directory with Sizes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds behavioral details: results prefix [FILE] and [DIR], and the constraint 'Only works within allowed directories.' No contradictions.

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 adding distinct value: purpose, distinguishing feature, and usage scope. 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 tool's simplicity, an output schema exists to document return values. The description covers purpose, constraint, and distinct formatting. Could mention error handling for invalid paths, but adequate.

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 description coverage is 50% (path has no description). The description mentions 'specified path' but doesn't explain the sortBy parameter at all. It adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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 it provides a detailed listing of files and directories with sizes, and distinguishes results with [FILE] and [DIR] prefixes. This differentiates it from sibling tools like list_directory (no sizes) and get_file_info (single 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 says it is 'useful for understanding directory structure and finding specific files,' which implies usage but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. Missing exclusionary guidance.

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