cloud_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no behavioral context beyond listing, such as authentication needs, pagination, rate limits, or what happens with the configured volume.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, but it is under-specified for a two-parameter generic cloud listing tool and provides no structural guidance.

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?

An output schema and annotations exist, so return values and safety are partly covered. However, the description omits required parameter semantics for 'volume' and lacks usage context, leaving the agent without enough information to confidently call the tool across providers.

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% for two parameters. The description does not mention 'path' or 'volume' at all; 'carpeta' only vaguely gestures at a path and does not compensate for the missing parameter documentation.

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 (Lista) and resource (carpeta) and names the supported providers (O2, Drive, OneDrive u otra cuenta configurada). This is clear, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools such as o2_list or cloud_stat.

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 mention of multiple cloud providers and 'otra cuenta configurada' implies use for listing folders across configured accounts, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or routing to alternatives like o2_list or cloud_stat.

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