list_results

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat that it is read-only. It adds context by specifying the file patterns (FDS.tar.gz, OPENFOAM-*.tar.gz), which helps the agent understand what is listed, but it does not disclose additional behaviors like output format or pagination.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the main action and includes useful examples. There is no unnecessary wording, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 simple list operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details on the return format (e.g., whether it returns file paths, sizes, or links). Given the sibling tools for downloading, the agent might need more context, but the low complexity and read-only annotation keep it acceptable.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that the 'folder' parameter refers to a 'case folder', adding meaning beyond the schema's bare 'folder' label. However, it does not specify the exact format (e.g., path or ID) or any constraints, leaving some ambiguity for a single required parameter.

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 'List' and the resource 'result archives of a case folder', with concrete examples (FDS.tar.gz, OPENFOAM-*.tar.gz). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_solvers and list_storage, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage by naming the resource, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. For example, it does not clarify how it differs from download_results or get_download_link, leaving the agent to infer based on the name alone.

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