List Roku docs

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, including the hierarchical tree browsing semantics, document counts at top level, and subfolder/document listing with a prefix. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. It front-loads the main purpose and immediately gives the two relevant usage modes.

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?

The description adequately explains the tool's behavior and return-like information (sections, counts, subfolders, documents) for a browsing operation. It is complete enough given the simple optional parameters and read-only annotation, though it does not detail error or edge-case behavior.

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?

Both parameters are already fully described in the input schema with type information and example values. The description adds minimal new parameter context, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's function: browsing the documentation tree and listing sections, subfolders, and documents. It is specific about behavior with and without a prefix, but does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like search_roku_docs.

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 provides clear usage context by explaining the no-prefix and with-prefix behaviors. However, it does not state when this tool should be used over alternatives such as search_roku_docs or get_roku_doc.

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