dashy_list_config_files

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals this is a safe, non-destructive operation. The description adds that it lists files available on the instance, which is consistent with the annotation but does not disclose additional behaviors like return format or pagination. Since the output schema exists, the return format is covered elsewhere, so the description adds some value but not extensive context.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters), the presence of an output schema, and the read-only annotation, the description is sufficiently complete. It clearly states what the tool does, and no additional context is needed for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 zero parameters, so the input schema is fully covered (100%). The description does not need to explain parameters but indirectly implies no arguments are required. With 0 params, the baseline is 4, and the description adequately complements the schema.

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's function: listing YAML config files on the Dashy instance. It uses a specific verb ('List') and defines the resource (YAML config files), effectively distinguishing it from siblings like dashy_get_config (which likely retrieves a specific config) and dashy_list_items (which lists items).

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 provides clear context that the tool lists available config files, implying it should be used to discover which configs exist. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the sibling tool names are self-explanatory, and the purpose is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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