Get properties

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description does add one non-obvious behavioral fact — that properties are derived by enumerating directory contents — but says nothing about what properties come back, cost on large directories, or behavior when the path is a file.

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 short sentence with the verb front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity comes at the cost of substance rather than from disciplined editing.

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?

With no output schema, the description is the only place an agent could learn what 'properties' actually contains (size, mtime, etag, permissions?), and it omits that entirely. For a helper whose return shape is undefined anywhere else, the definition is under-specified.

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% for the single 'path' parameter, so the description must carry the burden and it does not: no format (WebDAV vs local), no note that the default '' means the user root, no trailing-slash or file-vs-folder semantics. 'A path' adds nothing beyond the schema key name.

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?

It states a verb ('get') and resource ('properties of a path'), but 'properties' is never defined and the phrase 'by listing its contents' is an implementation detail rather than a purpose statement. An agent cannot tell from this how it differs from sibling nextcloud_list_contents or nextcloud_list_files.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this instead of nextcloud_list_contents, nextcloud_list_files, or nextcloud_read_file, despite those siblings covering overlapping ground. The only hint, 'by listing its contents', is descriptive rather than prescriptive.

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