get_largest_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses read-only behavior, non-recursive scanning, how directory sizes are computed (own stat size, not contents), and that failures silently return empty results. These are important behavioral characteristics beyond a simple 'list'.

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 two sentences with the main action in the first and limitations/alternatives in the second. No redundant fluff; every sentence adds value.

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?

With an output schema present, return format need not be described. The description covers purpose, scope, limitations, failure behavior, and alternatives, making it fully complete for a simple two-parameter 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 coverage is 100%, giving baseline 3. The description adds semantic value by clarifying the directory-size interpretation and the limit bounds (10-100), reinforcing schema details. However, the additional parameter insight is modest, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 lists the top N largest entries in a directory by size, with default path and limit details. The verb 'Lists' and resource 'top N largest entries' make the function explicit, and it distinguishes from get_disk_info by stating it is for quick space triage.

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?

It provides explicit usage guidance: 'Use for quick space triage; get_disk_info for partition-level capacity.' It also states limitations (non-recursive, single directory level) to set expectations, making it clear when this tool is appropriate.

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