list_directory

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that ~ is expanded, defaults are current directory and hidden off, and returns path/entries/count. However, it doesn't mention error handling, symlink behavior, or permission requirements. For a read operation, this is minimally adequate.

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?

Description is very concise: 6 lines with clear header, args section, and return section. Front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given no output schema, description includes return structure (path, entries with name/path/type/size, count). For a simple listing tool, this is fairly complete. However, it could be more explicit about being immediate children only and not recursive. No mention of error cases.

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 has 0% description coverage, so description must add meaning. It explains path's default and ~ expansion, and include_hidden's purpose ('Include dotfiles/dotdirs'). This adds significant value beyond bare schema types and defaults.

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?

Description clearly states 'List entries in a directory.' The verb 'list' and resource 'directory' are specific. Among siblings like 'list_windows' and 'search_glob', the purpose is unambiguous. Return format further clarifies.

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 explicit guidance on when to use list_directory vs alternatives like search_glob or file_info. Usage is implied but no exclusions or context provided. Could mention that for pattern-based searching, use search_glob.

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