list_basket

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses a critical behavioral trait: 'The private/ subfolder is NEVER listed — it contains personal or patient data.' This goes beyond the schema, but other aspects like read-only nature or side effects are not covered.

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: first delivers the core purpose, second adds essential context. No fluff, front-loaded, every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given zero parameters and an output schema (not shown but present), the description covers the necessary scope. It explains the basket's flat nature and the critical private folder exclusion, making it complete for effective use.

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 tool has no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Per rubric, baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information because none exist.

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 'List files in the Metis basket' with a specific verb and resource. It further differentiates by mentioning 'legacy & inspiration documents' and the flat nature of the basket, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_folder.

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 implies usage for viewing files in the Metis basket but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_folder. No exclusion or alternative guidance is provided, leaving the agent to infer context.

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