list_directory

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

The description discloses the output format (FILE or DIR labeling) but does not specify behavior for edge cases like nonexistent paths, hidden files, or recursion. With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden but only partially fulfills it.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose and supplemented with parameter details. It is concise with no redundancy.

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 has a single parameter and an output schema, and the description covers the core usage. However, it lacks details about error handling and listing scope (e.g., recursive), though the simplicity of the tool mitigates this gap.

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 description includes an Args section explaining that the 'path' parameter is a directory path relative to the workspace, defaulting to the workspace root. This adds semantic meaning absent from the input schema, which has no description and only a default of '.'.

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 tool lists directory entries in the workspace and labels each entry as FILE or DIR, distinguishing it from sibling file read/write tools.

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 is provided on when to use this tool over read_file or write_file, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The description only covers basic usage with the path argument.

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