Lists files and folders in an Android directory, with pagination, relative to a specified root path.
List entries in an authorized directory, paginated. Paths are relative to rootId. Does not use UI.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| rootId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description mentions 'Does not use UI' which adds behavioral context beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations. It does not describe output, errors, or side effects, but annotations already cover safety aspects, so the bar is lower.
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 two succinct sentences, free of redundancy, front-loading the core action and key qualifiers.
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?
While the description communicates the essential operation, it omits output schema, error cases, and whether entries include files and directories. For a simple list operation without output schema, this is adequate but not fully complete for an agent to anticipate all responses.
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?
With 0% schema coverage, the description carries param explanation. It clarifies that paths are relative to rootId (helping path and rootId), and 'paginated' implies limit/offset usage. However, no explicit details on default values or exact meaning of 'entries' are given.
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 tool lists directory entries, with pagination, distinguishing it from sibling file operations like read, write, and delete. The phrase 'authorized directory' and relative-path note clarify scope.
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 explicit guidance on when to choose this over sibling tools such as android_file_search or android_file_stat. The note about not using UI hints at a non-UI approach, but does not provide direct alternative selection criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.