List Files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds only minimal behavioral context (file categories and return fields), which is largely duplicated by the output schema. No additional behaviors like pagination or rate limits are disclosed.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then filter guidance, then sibling pointer. No redundant words or unnecessary detail.

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 tool's low complexity (2 params, no enums), strong annotations, and presence of output schema, the description adequately covers selection and invocation. The alternative pointer to read_file adds contextual 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both course_id and search documented. The description's mention of filtering by filename repeats schema semantics ('Filter by filename fragment') without adding new syntax or format details.

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 action ('List files'), the scope ('in a course'), the content categories ('lecture slides, notes, readings'), and the returned fields ('name, type, and size'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling read_file, which is for getting file content.

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?

It instructs to use read_file for obtaining text, providing an explicit alternative and implying when this tool should not be used. It also explains the search parameter's function, giving clear context for filter usage.

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