Directory Tree

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

The description adds behavioral detail beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by specifying the recursive nature and JSON structure of the output. It also mentions the constraint of working only within allowed directories, which is useful 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 concise (two sentences) and well-structured, with no redundant information. Every sentence adds meaningful detail about the tool's behavior and constraints.

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?

While the description mentions 'within allowed directories', it fails to explain the required 'path' parameter or the optional 'excludePatterns' parameter. Given the schema has no descriptions and the output schema is not visible, the description is insufficient for full usage clarity.

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 schema has zero description coverage, and the tool description does not explain any of the two parameters (path and excludePatterns). Without compensation, the agent cannot fully understand what values are valid or how they affect the output.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource (recursive tree view). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_directory by emphasizing 'recursive', making its purpose unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that list_directory or search_files are better suited for flat or filtered needs, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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