list-assets

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it labels itself 'read-only', states it lists only immediate (non-recursive) contents, and specifies return details (size/type/public URL). No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences: the first defines the tool's function, the second provides usage guidance. No unnecessary words; information is front-loaded and efficiently presented.

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 list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (folders + files with size/type/public URL) and the default behavior. Could mention limits or authentication but is adequate for agent use.

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% and the schema already provides a detailed description for the remotePath parameter. The description adds the default behavior (empty/omitted lists root) but does not add significant meaning 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'contents of a directory under Foundry Data/ root'. It specifies return items (folders + files with size/type/public URL) and gives an example path. This differentiates it from sibling tools like asset-info (single asset) and upload-asset.

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?

The description says 'Use to browse uploaded assets' with an example, clearly indicating when to use this tool. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare to alternatives, but the context of sibling tools makes this clear.

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