card_builder_list_media

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions listing files/folders, but does not explain how the path parameter works, whether listing is recursive, or if there are any side effects. For a read-only list operation, minimal info is provided.

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?

Description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately communicates purpose and directory context.

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 tool with an output schema, the description is largely adequate to distinguish from other listing tools. However, it lacks detail on parameter behavior and whether results are recursive, which could impact selection.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description adds some meaning by specifying the base directory. However, it does not explain the effect of the 'path' parameter (e.g., defaults to root, format) beyond the schema's default value.

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 'files/folders in the Card Builder media directory', with the relative path given. This distinguishes it from sibling listing tools like card_builder_list_cards, which focus on different resources.

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 the tool is for listing media files/folders, but does not explicitly state when to use it vs. alternatives like card_builder_list_cards or card_builder_list_style_presets. No guidance on when not to use or prerequisites.

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