sftp_listar

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: 'caminho' is resolved relative to the SFTP user's home directory, and 'padrao' is a case-insensitive glob. It stops short of describing what the listing returns (names only? sizes? timestamps?), and no output schema exists to fill that gap.

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?

Three short clauses, each carrying distinct information (what it does, how paths resolve, how the filter works), with the core action front-loaded. No padding, though the sentences are run together without separators, slightly hurting scanability.

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 three-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description should at minimum explain the required 'perfil' parameter and hint at the shape of the returned listing. It covers path and filter semantics well but omits both of those, leaving a meaningful gap for an agent trying to call it correctly.

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 must carry all parameter meaning. It explains the semantics of 'caminho' (relative to the SFTP home folder) and 'padrao' (glob pattern such as "*.log", case-insensitive), but leaves 'perfil' — the only required parameter — completely undefined; an agent cannot tell whether it is a profile name, host alias, or credential set.

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 states a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('uma pasta do servidor'), which is enough to distinguish it from read-oriented siblings like sftp_ler or sftp_ultimas_linhas. It never names a sibling explicitly, so differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb: list a remote directory, optionally filtered by glob. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over sftp_buscar (search) or sftp_info, and no exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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