colab_list_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It accurately indicates a non-mutating listing operation and the path base, but does not disclose default-path behavior, recursion behavior, or the shape of the returned listing, leaving some behavior to inference.

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 with the action front-loaded and an explicit path example. The second sentence clarifies path semantics without redundancy or fluff; both sentences earn their place.

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 list tool, the description covers the core operation and path semantics. However, it omits session_id, the meaning of the empty default path, and the return format. With no output schema and no annotations, the description should fill more of these gaps to be fully self-contained.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains path semantics well, but session_id is entirely undocumented in both the schema and the description, leaving one of two parameters without any semantic guidance.

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?

Uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('files and directories under a path in the runtime's sandboxed workspace'), clearly identifying the operation. It distinguishes the tool from sibling file operations like read_file, write_file, and download_file; no sibling provides the same listing function.

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?

Provides clear context by explaining that the path is relative to the sandboxed workspace, which is necessary for constructing correct inputs. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the listing purpose and sandbox scope make the appropriate usage clear among the colab_* siblings.

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