list_dir_mappings

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully convey behavior. It only states 'List directory mappings', implying a read operation but does not clarify side effects, return format, or any constraints. This is insufficient for transparent behavioral disclosure.

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 extremely short—only two words—and to the point. It avoids redundancy, but could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose. Still, it earns a 4 for being succinct and 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (no parameters, output schema exists), the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain what 'directory mappings' represent or provide any context about the expected output. A bit more context would improve completeness.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%. According to the rubric, 0 parameters yields a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema already provides, but no additional explanation is needed.

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 specific resource 'directory mappings', providing a clear purpose. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like list_pci_mappings or list_usb_mappings, which are similarly named and could be confused.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_directory_storage or other list_* mapping tools. The description lacks any context about prerequisites or preferred use cases.

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