browse_local_splice_directory

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower, yet the description still adds real behavior: symlinks and non-audio files are skipped, results are paged, and metadata (tags/favorites) is joined optionally. It does not describe ordering or what an empty page means, but this is well beyond the annotation baseline.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then optional metadata, then how to chain into search, then exclusions. No filler and every sentence carries distinct information.

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 paged local-directory listing with no output schema, the description covers scope, paging, optional metadata, and skips, which is enough to invoke correctly. It leaves the shape of returned entries (file vs folder fields) unspecified, which is a minor gap given no output schema exists.

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 100%, with limit/offset defaults and rootPath semantics documented in the schema itself. The description echoes the optional metadata join and paging behavior but adds no new parameter-level detail (e.g., ordering, offset stability), so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Page through') and resource ('immediate subfolders and audio files inside a configured local Splice root'), scoping it to immediate children rather than recursive search. This clearly separates it from siblings like search_local_splice_samples and list_local_splice_roots.

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?

Gives actionable context: 'Returned folder paths can be searched individually when a broad search is truncated,' which tells the agent how this tool composes with search. It also names explicit exclusions ('not Splice cloud browsing, downloads, or license verification'). It stops short of naming a specific sibling alternative for those excluded cases, so not a 5.

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