list_guide_files

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the return format (sorted list of dictionaries with path, name, size) and raises errors (FileNotFoundError, PermissionError). It also explains the directory parameter's behavior in detail.

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 concise yet structured with Args, Returns, and Raises sections. 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 the tool has only one optional parameter and returns a simple list of file info, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, parameter behavior, return format, and error conditions. Output schema exists but description already explains the return.

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 has 0% coverage (no parameter descriptions), but the description adds meaningful context: directory is optional, restricts listing when given, and searches all configured directories when omitted. This compensates well.

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 clearly states the verb 'list' and the resource 'Norton Guide (.ng) files'. It specifies the scope 'available to the server', which differentiates it from sibling tools that perform search, following links, or reading entries.

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 provides clear context: it lists files, with an optional directory to restrict the listing. It explains behavior when directory is omitted versus provided, and mentions error conditions. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the sibling tools cover other operations.

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