top_dirs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic purpose: no mention of recursion behavior, performance implications, sorting order, or how parameters like maxDepth or maxFiles affect results. This is a significant gap for a scanning tool.

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 extremely brief (one fragment), which is not conciseness but under-specification. While it is front-loaded, it omits critical information needed for correct use. Every sentence should earn its place, but here the single sentence is insufficient.

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 has 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It provides no context on return format, parameter effects, potential side effects, or when to use it. This is inadequate for a tool of this complexity.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any parameters. It only implicitly mentions rootPath via 'under root' and file size sorting, but limit, maxDepth, maxFiles, ignoreGlobs, and includeGlobs are entirely unexplained. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: finding heaviest directories by aggregate file size under a root. It distinguishes itself from sibling tool 'top_files' by focusing on directories rather than files. However, it lacks an explicit verb (e.g., 'list' or 'find'), so it is a noun phrase rather than a full sentence.

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 versus alternatives like top_files or stale_candidates. The description only states what it does, not the context for choosing it. There are no exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools.

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