list_directory

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

With no annotations, description carries burden; it mentions prefixes and allowed directories but omits behaviors like recursion depth, hidden files handling, error cases, or read-only nature. It implies non-destructiveness but doesn't state 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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. Critical constraint (allowed directories) is front-loaded. Every word adds value.

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?

Lacks output sample or details on error handling (e.g., invalid path). With no output schema, description should clarify expected result format beyond prefixes. Adequate for a simple list but not fully complete.

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 covers path parameter fully (100%). Description adds value by specifying output formatting with [FILE]/[DIR] prefixes, which is not in schema. Could be slightly more explicit about path format, but overall good.

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?

Clearly states action (list directory contents) and output format (prefixes [FILE] or [DIR]), and distinguishes from siblings like directory_tree by implying a flat list. The scope restriction to /app further clarifies purpose.

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?

Specifies the allowed directory constraint, which is useful context. However, no guidance on when to use this vs siblings like directory_tree or get_file_info, nor when not to use it.

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