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. It discloses the default root behavior and folder scoping, but it does not mention return format, pagination, or how 'search' affects results. This is minimal but not misleading.

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 that directly states the tool's purpose and key behavior. No unnecessary words or 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?

This is a simple tool with only two optional params and no output schema or annotations. The description adequately covers the basic operation but lacks details on result behavior (e.g., whether subfolders are included, if pagination applies). It's a minimum viable description with some gaps.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (search, folder_id) with 100% coverage, so the description adds little extra meaning beyond clarifying the root default, which the schema already states as 'omit for root'.

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 tool's function: 'List files in a folder (or root if no folder specified).' It uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('files'), plus scope ('folder/root'), which distinguishes it from related tools like get_file, delete_file, and list_folders.

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 conveys clear usage context: it is for listing files in a specified folder or the root if omitted. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the straightforward wording makes it obvious when to use this tool over other file-related operations.

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