kb_scan_inbox

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the burden; 'List' implies a safe read, but it says nothing about permissions, ordering, limits, or whether subdirectories of _Inbox are included. The triage-workflow sentence adds genuine context beyond the structured fields, which earns partial credit.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and its scope, followed by the follow-up step. No filler or restated name.

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?

Return values are covered by the output schema, so the remaining gaps are behavioral and parametric: recursion, result limits, and preview_chars meaning. Adequate to call the tool, but not complete for a tool whose parameter is entirely undocumented.

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?

preview_chars has 0% schema description coverage and the description never mentions it. 'Short content preview' gestures at controllable preview length but does not state units, defaults, truncation behavior, or acceptable ranges, so the single parameter remains effectively undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb ('List'), resource ('files'), and a narrow scope ('_Inbox'), plus an output shape ('short content preview'). This differentiates it in practice from kb_list_tree's whole-tree listing and kb_search, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Explicitly describes the downstream workflow: use previews to pick a target category and new name, then call kb_move_file. That is a clear when-to-use signal, but it gives no exclusions or guidance on when kb_list_tree or kb_search would be preferred instead.

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