list_files

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden but only states that it lists files/subfolders. It does not disclose whether this is a read-only operation, required permissions, pagination behavior, or response format. This is insufficient for safe and correct invocation.

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 concise sentence with no filler words. It is front-loaded and easy to read, scoring full points for efficiency.

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's 7 parameters and lack of output schema/annotations, the description is too sparse to provide complete context. It does not specify return data structure, default limits, or how subfolders are represented. Significant gaps remain for an agent to understand the full behavior.

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 covers 71% of parameters with descriptions, and the description adds no additional semantic detail. Parameters like limit and offset remain undocumented, and the description simply restates the type enum without explaining behavior edge cases (e.g., folder_id behavior when omitted).

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 identifies the tool's function with a specific verb ('lists') and resource ('files and subfolders') in Stashcat storage areas. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_file_info or upload_file by explicitly stating the listing scope.

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 usage via its clear purpose but offers no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over alternatives like download_file or get_file_info. No exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned.

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