list_recent_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 the scope ('entire disk'), the recency filter, and the limit range, which are useful. However, it omits behavioral details such as sort order, whether trashed files are included, and whether it is a read-only operation (though 'List' implies non-destructive).

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 extremely concise, with one purpose sentence and one parameter explanation. Every word earns its place, and it is front-loaded with the core action.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It states the scope and parameter behavior. It could mention sorting order or whether it includes trashed files, but given the low complexity and existing output schema, it is adequately 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?

The schema only defines 'limit' as an integer with a default of 20, but the description's Args section adds the range (1–100) and meaning (Max number of files to return). This fully compensates for the 0% schema description coverage, though it doesn't explain the default value in more detail.

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 starts with a specific verb ('List') and defines the resource ('recently uploaded files') with a clear scope ('across the entire disk'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_files (which likely lists all files in a context) and search_files (which searches by query).

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 provides clear context: use this tool to get recently uploaded files across the entire disk. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is specific enough that an agent can infer when to use it. No 'when not to use' guidance is given.

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