file

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Show file info' without specifying whether it reads metadata only, requires existing files, or has side effects. Important behavioral details like permission needs or error conditions are omitted.

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 extremely concise with a single well-structured sentence. It is front-loaded and easy to parse. However, it may be overly terse, sacrificing completeness for brevity.

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 complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations) and the presence of many sibling tools with overlapping functionality, the description fails to provide enough context. It does not explain the return value, parameter roles, or how this tool differs from similar ones like 'files' or 'folder'.

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 has 3 parameters with only 33% description coverage (only 'vault' is described). The description adds no additional meaning for the parameters 'file' and 'path', leaving their roles unclear. The schema itself also lacks descriptions for these critical parameters.

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 'Show file info' identifies the action (show) and resource (file info), but it is vague regarding what specific information is shown. It does not distinguish this tool from similar sibling tools like 'read' (which reads file contents) or 'properties' (which may show metadata), leading to potential confusion.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'files' (list files) or 'read' (read content). There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or excluded use cases, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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