list_diagrams

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

The description states 'Find' which implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly disclose that this tool has no side effects. It also omits that the search is recursive by default, as shown in the schema. Without annotations, the description is insufficiently transparent about behavior.

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 starts with the core action 'Find all Monodraw diagram files.' It wastes no words and is easily scannable.

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 relatively simple, but the description does not specify the return format (e.g., list of file paths) or behavior when no files are found. It omits the recursive default from the schema. Given that no output schema exists, the description leaves gaps for the agent to discover at runtime.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (directory and recursive), covering 100% of parameters. The description's phrase 'in a directory' aligns with the directory parameter but adds no new information. The recursive parameter behavior is not reflected in the description 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 identifies the tool as a directory search operation for Monodraw diagram files, specifying the exact file extensions (.monopic, .monojson). This distinctly separates it from sibling tools that export, open, preview, or create ASCII art.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, nor does it reference sibling tools like export_diagram. The agent is left to infer appropriate usage solely from the tool name and description.

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