Lists files and directories inside a VirtualBox guest VM using a VM name or UUID and path, with an option to include hidden entries.
List a directory in the guest.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| vm | Yes | VM name or UUID | |
| path | Yes | ||
| showHidden | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says only that it lists a directory and does not describe permissions, error behavior, path resolution, hidden-file behavior, or any other operational trait beyond the basic action.
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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, its extreme brevity comes at the cost of under-specification rather than achieving useful conciseness.
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 tool has three parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and low schema description coverage. The one-sentence description is not complete enough for an agent to understand how to invoke the tool correctly, particularly regarding path handling and the showHidden parameter.
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 only 33%, with the path and showHidden parameters undocumented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning at all; it does not explain the vm identifier, path semantics, or the showHidden flag.
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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List a directory in the guest.' This clearly identifies a directory-listing operation scoped to the guest filesystem. It does not explicitly differentiate this tool from siblings such as read_guest_file or execute_command, which prevents a full score.
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 no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as read_guest_file, execute_command, or other guest-file tools. It only implies that it is for directory listing, leaving the agent to infer all usage conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.