List C# Scripts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: results are paginated, default folder is 'Assets', and each entry carries a size. Return-field detail is still absent, but with annotations handling the safety profile this is a solid addition.

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?

Three short lines: purpose first, then args, then usage. Every sentence carries information and nothing is padded.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description compensates by naming the returned content (file paths plus sizes) and the pagination model. It does not specify ordering of results or how 'sizes' are reported, which is a minor remaining gap for a listing tool.

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 folder, filter, limit, offset and response_format with defaults and bounds. The description only restates default 'Assets', 'filter substring (optional)' and 'limit/offset', adding no syntax or formatting meaning beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (List), resource (.cs files), scope (under a project folder), and extras (sizes, paginated), which an agent can distinguish from unity_read_script or unity_list_assets. It does not explicitly name a sibling it is not, so it falls short of the 5 bar for sibling differentiation.

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 'Use when: finding where game code lives before reading or editing it' line gives a clear activation context and implicitly routes to unity_read_script/unity_update_script as the follow-ups. No explicit exclusions or named alternatives are provided, so it is not a 5.

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