file_list

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

Annotations are not provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'list files,' which implies a read operation, but it does not describe recursion behavior, access permissions, side effects, or the output format. The description is severely inadequate for a tool with no annotation support.

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 short sentence, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It omits essential information about behavior and parameters, making it more of a placeholder than an effective description.

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 presence of multiple file-related sibling tools and no annotations, this description is completely inadequate. It does not explain the tool's behavior, parameters, or usage context. The output schema exists but does not compensate for the lack of narrative guidance.

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 of the three parameters (root, limit, pattern). An agent cannot infer the meaning or purpose of these parameters from the description, so it adds no value beyond the raw schema fields.

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 'Liệt kê file trong vùng dữ liệu cho phép' translates to 'List files in the allowed data area.' It names a verb and resource, but 'allowed data area' is vague and does not differentiate from sibling tools like file_tree or file_search. It is not a tautology but lacks the specificity needed for an agent to understand what the tool does.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like file_tree (likely a directory listing) or file_search (likely pattern-based search). No conditions, exclusions, or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving the agent to guess.

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