Get pinned files

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it retrieves a list, but no details on response structure, ordering, or pagination. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Description is very short (two brief sentences) and front-loads the core purpose. No wasted words, though it could include more useful context without being verbose.

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?

Tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema) and annotations cover safety, so the description is mostly complete. However, it lacks guidance on hostId provenance, any related tools, or what 'pinned' implies. For a simple read tool, this is minimally viable.

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%, but there is only one parameter, hostId. The description mentions 'for a specific host', implying hostId identifies the host. This adds some meaning beyond the schema, but no description of the hostId format or how to obtain it. For a single parameter, this is acceptable.

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 the verb 'Get' and the resource 'pinned files for a specific host', which is clear and specific. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like termix_hosts_get_recent_files by mentioning 'pinned files' explicitly, though it doesn't name the sibling.

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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_recent_files or get_shortcuts. It doesn't explain what 'pinned' means or when a user would need it. No exclusions or alternative tool names are provided.

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