list_directory

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the root-path convention but does not mention whether listing is direct-only or recursive, whether hidden files are included, or any relevant ordering or error behavior. These are not severe for a simple directory lister, but the description is far from exhaustive.

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, direct sentence that states the action, the target, and a key usage tip, with absolutely no fluff or redundant phrasing. Every word contributes.

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 one-parameter read-only listing tool without an output schema, the description is largely sufficient: it tells the agent what the tool does and how to target the root. The only minor gap is the lack of explicit mention about whether the listing is non-recursive, but this is not a critical omission given typical expectations and the tool's simplicity.

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?

The schema already provides a description for the single parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds incremental meaning by specifying that both '' and '/' resolve to the vault root, which is not fully captured by the schema's example. This extra semantic guidance earns a 4.

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 specifies a clear verb ('List') and resource ('files and folders under a vault directory'), making its purpose unmistakable. It also clarifies the special root-directory case, and its function is distinct from sibling tools that operate on notes, active notes, or commands.

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 implies its use when one needs to browse the vault's file structure, but it does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools like search_notes or get_note. The root path guidance ('directory=' or '/'') is useful practical direction, but there is no broader when-to-use statement.

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