arvan_s3_list_objects

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, response format, or cost implications. It is neutral but does not contradict annotations.

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 sentence of 10 words, very concise. However, it is so brief that it omits critical parameter context, making it less effective.

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 list operation with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description should cover pagination (max_keys, continuation_token) and filtering behavior. It only mentions bucket and prefix, leaving users uninformed about important options.

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 description coverage is 0%. The description only mentions 'bucket' and 'prefix' implicitly but does not explain max_keys, continuation_token, or their purposes. It adds no value beyond the schema field names.

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 'List objects in a bucket (optionally under a prefix)' clearly states the action (list), resource (objects), and scope (bucket and optional prefix). It distinguishes from sibling tools like arvan_s3_list_buckets and arvan_s3_get_object.

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 is straightforward but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or any prerequisites. No explicit when-not or exclusion criteria.

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