list_directory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It only states that the tool lists entries; it does not disclose whether it is non-recursive, whether hidden files are included, what happens with invalid paths, or the exact return shape. These gaps matter because there is no output schema.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant wording. It communicates the core action and resource efficiently.

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 one-parameter tool, the description plus schema is mostly sufficient, but it omits behavioral details such as whether the listing is top-level only, whether hidden files appear, and how it differs from the 'list_files' sibling. The lack of an output schema makes those details more relevant.

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 already fully describes the single 'path' parameter with a default and explanation (100% coverage). The description adds no additional semantics beyond echoing 'at a given path', so the baseline score of 3 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 names a specific verb and resource: 'List the files and directories at a given path.' It is understandable and not tautological, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the closely named sibling 'list_files', so it misses the top score.

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?

There is no guidance about when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as 'list_files', nor any mention of when not to use it. The intended use is only implied by the verb 'List' and the tool name, so the agent is left to infer selection.

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