List music files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context by naming the two scanned directories and mentioning sizes, but it omits whether the listing is recursive, ordered, or paginated across folders.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states exactly what the tool does, where it looks, and what it returns. No filler or redundancy.

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 low-complexity, single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description gives enough to invoke it correctly: what is listed, where, and that sizes are included. It could be more explicit about the returned entry structure (e.g., paths vs names), but the gap is minor.

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%, so the single 'limit' parameter is fully documented in the schema as 'Max entries per folder'. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 gives a specific verb (List), a precise resource (.mp3 files), and exact scope (Muzik/ and Content/Sounds/), plus a return detail (with sizes). No sibling tool lists music files, so it is unmistakable against reanim_list_dances, reanim_list_movesets, etc.

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 states what is listed but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives. The agent must infer that this tool is for inspecting available music files, which is not spelled out.

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