monitor_file_metadata

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

No annotations provided; description only states 'metadata polling' without disclosing read-only nature, side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits. Minimal behavioral context.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence identifies the action and target, the second clarifies what the tool does not do. Efficient and front-loaded.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description does not mention return values or behavior (e.g., polling starts immediately, returns array of snapshots). Lacks critical context for a polling tool with configurable parameters.

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?

Only the path parameter has a schema description (33% coverage). The tool description adds context that duration_seconds and interval_seconds control polling timing, but does not explain each parameter in detail.

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 polls file size and timestamps, and explicitly distinguishes it from access tracing, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_filesystem_info or analyze_file_distribution). The negative hint about access tracing is present but insufficient for making informed tool selection.

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