Workspace List All Files

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two real behavioral facts beyond them: pagination is followed automatically, and symlinks are silently excluded unless explicitly filtered for. That default-exclusion behavior is exactly the kind of hidden trait an agent needs.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and pagination note, then parameter semantics. Slightly redundant to inline parameter docs that mirror the schema fields, but every sentence carries 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations cover the safety profile. The remaining gap is the absence of any disambiguation against 'workspace_list_files', a sibling whose name suggests overlapping function.

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%, so the description must carry the burden and it largely does: it explains parent_id's purpose and enumerates the accepted type_filter values ('workbook', 'folder', 'data-model', 'template', 'symlink'), which the schema does not. It stops short of stating what happens when parent_id is null (root vs. whole org).

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 and resource with scope ('List files/folders in the organization'), plus the pagination behavior. However, it does not differentiate itself from the sibling 'workspace_list_files', leaving the agent to guess which of the two near-identical listers to call.

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?

Usage is implied (org-wide listing with optional narrowing by parent folder or type), and the symlink note gives a concrete conditional rule for when shortcuts appear. But there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over 'workspace_list_files' or the various workbooks_/datasets_ listers.

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