list_allowed_dirs

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It reveals non-obvious behavior (default cwd included; workspace granted by default until more directories are added), and the verb 'List' signals a read-only operation. It doesn't explicitly say 'no side effects,' but nothing suggests mutation.

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 tightly written sentences: the first front-loads the core action and resource, the second adds the key default-state behavior. No filler or redundancy.

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 parameterless read-only listing tool, the description covers what the result includes and the default grant behavior. It doesn't specify the output format, but with no output schema and a simple list, this is a minor gap.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds context about what will be listed, which is all that parameter semantics could require.

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 opens with the specific verb 'List' and a precise resource: directories local Cursor agents may write to, plus the default cwd. This clearly distinguishes it from mutation siblings like add_allowed_dir and remove_allowed_dir.

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?

It provides useful context ('The workspace is granted by default until you add more') and implies the list operation is how to inspect the current grant. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, so it stops short of a 5.

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