list_files

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the operation is a read/list (safe), explains pagination parameters (page, items_per_page), and mentions the return type 'PaginatedResponse[File]'. This provides sufficient behavioral insight for a listing tool.

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 uses a docstring-style block with Args and Returns sections. While clear, it is slightly verbose for a tool description; could be more concise by omitting repetitive parameter defaults already in schema.

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?

Given 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential purpose, parameters, and return type. However, it does not explain how to choose between course_id and folder_id or what values 'include' accepts, which would improve completeness.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description adds meaning by explaining each parameter beyond name and type (e.g., 'Optional list of additional data to include' for 'include'). It clarifies the purpose of course_id and folder_id and pagination details.

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 'files', and specifies the scope 'for a course or folder'. This effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_file' (singular file) and other list 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 implies that one of course_id or folder_id must be provided but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_file'. It lacks guidance on selection criteria or when not to use.

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