list_temp_resources

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly communicates the read-only listing nature and supported filters, but it does not explain the scope of 'available' (e.g., session-persistence, expiry) or any ordering/edge-case behavior. This is adequate but not rich.

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 one introductory sentence and two bullet points, each carrying necessary information. No filler or redundancy exists; it is well-structured for quick parsing.

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?

The tool is simple, has an output schema, and the description covers its core purpose plus both parameters. Minor ambiguities around what 'available temporary files' means remain, but the overall context is sufficient for a tool of this complexity.

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 explicitly explains both parameters, including allowed MIME types for content_type and the limiting effect of max_items. Since the input schema has no descriptions, this fully compensates for the schema's lack of detail and adds meaningful guidance.

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 lists available temporary files, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_resource_base64 or get_pdf_info by focusing on enumeration rather than retrieval or processing.

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 clearly indicates the tool is for listing temporary files with optional filters, providing obvious context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or situations where another tool would be preferred, so it stops short of a 5.

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