pan_list_dir

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool performs a read-only listing of a directory, but does not mention authentication requirements, default-space behavior, pagination, hidden files, or sort order. This is minimally informative.

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?

The description is a single compact sentence with no filler. The action verb '列出' leads, and the object is precisely stated. Every word earns its 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 simple directory-listing tool, the description gives the basic operation and the schema covers parameters, but there is no guidance on return format, required authentication state, or when to choose this over sibling tools. With no output schema and no annotations, this leaves meaningful gaps.

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 schema already documents path and space, including defaults and examples. The description adds little beyond restating that the operation targets a directory, which matches the path parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the parameter burden.

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 a specific verb ('list') and resource ('files and subdirectories under a directory of the SJTU cloud drive'), making the core purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like pan_list_spaces or pan_file_info, but the resource scope is concrete enough to avoid major ambiguity.

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 is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pan_search, pan_list_spaces, or pan_download_dir. The description merely states what it does; an agent must infer that listing a known directory is the appropriate use case.

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