List stored objects

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds a little extra context by hinting at the output format ('size TAB key') and the prefix scoping, but it does not mention pagination, limits, or whether the listing is complete. This is sufficient for a simple read-only list but not richer than what annotations already imply.

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. The parenthetical 'size TAB key' is compact but slightly cryptic, which prevents a perfect score.

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 tool with one optional parameter meaningful read-only annotations, the definition is largely complete. It explains the listing behavior, the prefix filter, and hints at the output layout. The absence of pagination or limitation details is a minor gap given the functional simplicity.

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 clarify the 'prefix' parameter. It does state that listing is 'optionally under a prefix', which adds meaning to the bare schema property. However, it does not specify the exact prefix semantics, such as whether a trailing slash is required or whether the prefix is a key prefix or a directory-like path.

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 stored objects' with an optional prefix filterabile. It does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like get/put/rm, but the verb and resource make the core behavior unambiguous.

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 choose ls over alternatives or when to use the prefix option. The optional prefix is mentioned, but no context, examples, or exclusions are provided, so the agent must infer how this tool fits among its siblings.

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