mod_file_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds that the tool returns file sizes and SHA-256 revisions, which is useful context but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations imply.

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 that conveys the core purpose without any filler. Every word is necessary and the information is front-loaded.

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 list operation with one parameter and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. However, it omits clarification of what constitutes a 'mod workspace' or how the file list is scoped, which could aid understanding despite the output schema.

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 description fails to explain the required 'mod_name' parameter—what it refers to, how to obtain its value, or its role in listing files. With 0% schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not, leaving the parameter underspecified.

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 action ('List mod workspace files') and the information returned ('sizes and SHA-256 revisions'). It is specific and distinct from sibling tools, which focus on other operations like reading/writing files or managing maps and vehicles.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing to select a mod workspace first) or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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