List objects in a Scaleway Object Storage bucket

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description's main job is to add operational context. It does this by disclosing pagination behavior and the continuation-token flow, plus the folder-like delimiter grouping. No contradiction with 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 two short sentences, with the main action and object first and only essential operational details (pagination) afterward. Every clause earns its place and no schema details are needlessly repeated.

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 read-only list operation with rich inline parameter descriptions, this is contextually complete: it states the scope, optional filtering, delimiter grouping, and pagination contract. The absent output schema is mitigated by references to returned continuation tokens and common_prefixes in parameter docs.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents all six parameters including defaults, max, enum, and continuation semantics. The description reinforces prefix/delimiter/pagination but adds little meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 opens with 'List object keys in a bucket,' a specific verb+resource statement that clearly distinguishes this from sibling S3 operations like listing buckets, getting an object, or deleting objects. It adds relevant scope modifiers (prefix, delimiter, pagination) without ambiguity.

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?

It clearly communicates when to use the tool: to enumerate keys in a bucket, optionally narrowed by prefix or grouped by delimiter. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for a list-objects task.

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