Supabase: List files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered and the description's job is smaller. It does add useful return information (file names, sizes, metadata), but it omits any mention that results are paginated via limit/offset and gives no hint about ordering or default page size.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the operation and followed by the return payload. The bracketed "[UNIFIED]" prefix is wasted leading text that delays the actual verb.

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 five-parameter tool with zero schema description coverage and no output schema, the description is thin: it leaves site undefined, never explains pagination or its defaults, and does not describe the returned metadata structure. An agent could call it, but likely with guesses about site and paging.

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 description coverage is 0% across five parameters, so the description must carry the meaning, and it only accounts for bucket and path. The required site parameter is entirely unexplained, and limit/offset appear in neither schema nor description despite implying pagination behavior an agent needs to know.

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 and resource ("List files in a bucket or folder path") and names the fields returned, so an agent can distinguish it from the many other list_* siblings by resource type. The leading "[UNIFIED]" tag adds no semantic value, and the description never contrasts it with adjacent tools such as supabase_list_buckets or supabase_download_file.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance; the agent must infer that this is the discovery step before supabase_download_file or supabase_delete_files. The bucket-vs-path distinction is mentioned only obliquely through the phrase "bucket or folder path", with no guidance on when to supply one versus the other.

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