List memory files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful scoping detail that listing is confined to "your memory" and may be narrowed by folder prefix, but it says nothing about what is returned (names vs. paths), ordering, or whether listing is recursive under a prefix.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the optional-prefix caveat is attached inline rather than padded into extra sentences.

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 zero-required-param read tool with annotations covering safety, the description is nearly sufficient. The one remaining gap, given no output schema, is that it never says what the listing contains or whether results are recursive.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents prefix with an example. The description adds only a second example with a nested path ('projects/keephaven'), which hints at hierarchical prefix matching but doesn't confirm whether matching is recursive or one level deep.

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 ("List the files in your memory") with the optional scoping dimension. It does not name how it differs from siblings like memory_search or memory_read, so an agent must infer that this enumerates rather than retrieves content.

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 by the word "List" and the folder-prefix note, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of memory_search as the alternative when the agent wants content rather than filenames.

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