List MQL5 source files

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the sandboxed/restricted scope and the enumerated allowed folders, but says nothing about recursion defaults, pagination, ordering, or what the listing actually returns. Sandbox context is real added value, but key behavioral traits are absent.

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?

Two tightly written sentences with the scope constraint front-loaded and the parameter hint second; every clause earns its place and nothing is redundant.

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 simple two-parameter read tool it covers purpose and scope adequately, but with no annotations and no output schema the description should at least explain the recursive flag and the shape of the result. Those gaps leave the agent guessing on a non-trivial option.

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 50%: 'dir' is documented in both places, while 'recursive' has no description in either the schema or the tool description. The description reinforces the dir semantics (relative path, omit for top level) and names the folder set, but leaves recursive unexplained.

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 (Lists) and resource (files/directories) and names the exact sandboxed scope (the MQL5 data folder) plus its allowed subfolders. An agent can distinguish this from read_file, write_file, and delete_file without opening any schema.

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?

Gives one actionable hint ('Omit dir to see the top-level allowed folders'), which is usage guidance for a parameter rather than for the tool as a whole. No alternatives or when-not conditions are named, and none are obvious among the siblings, so this is implied usage rather than explicit guidance.

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