List a workspace directory

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the key behavioral trait: the directory lives in a sandboxed workspace, implying confinement and relative paths. It omits whether listing is recursive, what errors occur for missing directories, and any permission/size constraints.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the core action stated first and the default-path rule second. Everything earns its place.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential scope and the default path behavior. It could note recursion behavior or flag that the output is a listing rather than file contents, but nothing critical is missing.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the default behavior ('Omit path to list the workspace root') and adds the sandbox framing, but does not add syntax constraints beyond what the schema already documents.

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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (files and subdirectories in a directory) scoped to the server's sandboxed 'workspace', which is clear and immediately actionable. It does not explicitly name a sibling tool, but the intent is unambiguous against read_file/write_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 gives one concrete usage rule ('Omit path to list the workspace root'), which tells the agent how to invoke it for the root case. It offers no guidance on when to prefer this over siblings like read_file or how it relates to listing notes.

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