list_files

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It discloses that the tool returns lightweight records without full note bodies, and mentions filtering options. Does not cover error conditions or performance implications, but clearly states read-only behavior.

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?

Description is very concise—three sentences total—with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded, and additional usage guidance is provided without 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (list with 4 optional filters, no output schema), the description covers purpose, return fields, filtering behavior, and usage context. No missing critical information.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions, but description adds meaningful context: explains the purpose of no_metadata (finding files without YAML), expands on level values, gives examples for sign, and clarifies subfolder scope. This adds significant value beyond 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?

Description clearly states the tool lists notes from the local index and returns lightweight records with specific fields. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_children and get_parents by specifying graph traversal use cases.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool ('inventory, filtering, finding files to inspect next'), provides a specific usage case (no_metadata=true for files without YAML), and names alternatives (get_children, get_parents) for different needs.

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