Get File Info

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior. The description adds that it returns size, dates, kind, and tags, which aligns with the annotations. However, it does not disclose additional behavioral traits like error handling (e.g., what happens if the path does not exist) or output structure. With annotations present, the description provides adequate but not enhanced transparency.

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, focused sentence that immediately conveys the tool's action and key output fields. No extraneous information, well 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description covers the essential purpose and output fields. It hints at the return content (size, dates, kind, tags) but does not specify the exact structure or whether additional fields are included. The presence of an output schema (not shown) reduces the need for full detail in the description. Sibling tools are numerous, but the description is sufficient for this file info tool.

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 100% (path described as 'Absolute file path'). The description does not add any new meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: to get detailed file information including specific attributes (size, dates, kind, tags). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_files (searching) or move_file (moving), as it focuses on retrieving metadata for a single file.

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 list_directory or search_files. The description does not mention prerequisites, such as file existence or permission requirements, limiting the agent's ability to decide optimal usage.

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