list_documents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden, but it only restates the tool's basic function. It does not disclose whether the listing is recursive, requires any permissions, or has side effects. Nothing contradicts expectations, but valuable behavioral details are absent.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it highly scannable.

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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter and an output schema present, the description is mostly sufficient. It clearly names the operation, and the schema covers parameter details. The lack of usage guidance is a minor gap but not critical for this low-complexity tool.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage for the single optional 'folder' parameter with a clear description (sub-path within documents directory, defaults to root). The tool description adds no parameter information, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('IELTS documents and folders'), making its purpose immediately identifiable. It also distinguishes from siblings like read_document and search_documents by indicating a listing operation over a specific domain.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_documents or gdrive_list_folder. The phrase 'IELTS documents' hints at a local repository, but there are no explicit exclusions or context for choosing between similar listing tools.

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