list_skill_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It clarifies that the tool returns a file tree (not file contents), supports subdirectories, and is intended for structural exploration. However, it does not mention output format, pagination, or any side effects. As a read-only listing tool, this is acceptable but not deeply transparent.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and includes a usage hint. No unnecessary words or repetition of schema details.

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 listing tool with fully documented parameters and a clear purpose, the description is adequate. It does not explain the response format, but no output schema exists and the tool's behavior is straightforward. The usage guidance adds contextual value.

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 fully documents all three parameters with descriptions and defaults (path, max_depth, skill_name). The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond the schema, 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 the file tree of a skill or a subdirectory within it') and identifies the specific resource (skill file tree). It also distinguishes this tool from siblings by positioning it as a pre-loading exploration step, contrasting with read/load tools.

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 gives explicit usage advice: 'Use this to understand a large skill's structure before deciding which files to load.' This implies when to use (before loading) and differentiates from load/read siblings. However, it does not name alternatives explicitly or state when not to use, 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.