list_files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds context by mentioning 'safe' and 'configured workspace path,' but 'safe' is vague and no additional behavior such as hidden-file handling, symlinks, or error conditions is disclosed.

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 short sentence that front-loads the primary action and resource. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 simple read-only listing tool with an output schema and safety annotations, the description is acceptable but not complete. The ambiguity of 'safe,' the missing parameter explanations, and the lack of sibling differentiation leave gaps an agent must guess about.

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%, and the description does not explain the path or max_entries parameters at all. It mentions 'workspace path' in general but does not clarify that path selects a subdirectory or that max_entries limits results, leaving the agent without needed parameter semantics.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('safe files and directories under the configured workspace path'), making the tool's basic function obvious. It differentiates from read_file and search_text, though it does not explicitly differentiate from the similarly named sibling workspace_list.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as workspace_list or search_text. The description implies a listing use case, but it does not state exclusions, when not to use it, or which sibling covers other scenarios.

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