list_object_store_files

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description's 'List' is consistent but adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., pagination, limits, performance impact). The bar is lowered due to annotations, but no extra value beyond stating the obvious.

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?

One-sentence description is efficient and front-loaded with the key action. Could benefit from a slightly more structured format (e.g., bullet points for key details) but remains concise.

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, the description does not need to detail return values. However, it lacks context about the 'directory' scope, constraints on organizationId, and how listing behaves with nested folders. Given the number of sibling file-related tools, more context would improve selection accuracy.

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% (top-level parameter 'model' lacks description). The tool description does not explain parameters; it only mentions 'specific directory' which loosely maps to the 'path' parameter. The nested schema has descriptions, but the tool description adds no value beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action (List) and resource (Object Store files) with a specific scope (under a directory in an organization). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like read_object_properties or upload_object.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like read_object_store_file_download_url or read_object_properties. No exclusions or context about directory listing depth or permissions.

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