ftp_list

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

The description indicates a read-only listing action, which implies no mutation, but it does not disclose permission requirements, impersonation semantics, or any side effects. With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden and provides only minimal behavioral context.

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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose. The Args section is somewhat redundant with the schema but still compact and easy to scan.

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?

The tool is simple and has an output schema, so return values are presumably covered. However, the description leaves ambiguity about the expected domain format and the meaning of impersonate in practice, especially for an admin versus reseller context. It is minimally adequate but not fully complete.

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 for the schema's lack of parameter details. The Args section merely repeats the parameter names with terse definitions ('Domain.', 'Owning user.'), adding little beyond the existing titles. It does not explain formats, constraints, or the optionality/behavior of impersonate.

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 operation: 'List FTP accounts for a domain.' This is a specific verb plus resource, and it naturally distinguishes from sibling mutations like ftp_create and ftp_delete.

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 intended use is implied by the verb 'List' and the domain scope, but there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over other tools or any exclusions. For a simple list operation, this implied guidance is adequate but not explicit.

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