myob_company_list_files

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a potential auth requirement ('New MYOB OAuth flows may require businessId from consent instead') and 'Try to' suggests possible failure. However, it doesn't state whether the operation is read-only, what happens on failure, or return format. The transparency is partial.

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 sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states the action, the second provides a caveat. Every word earns its place, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain return values and prerequisites. It mentions a potential OAuth issue but leaves 'accessible company files' ambiguous and does not describe what the list contains or how results are delivered. It is minimally sufficient but lacks important context.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific detail because none exist. It mentions businessId as an external requirement from consent, which is context beyond parameters but not parameter semantics.

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 states the verb 'list' and resource 'company files', but the phrase 'Try to list accessible company files' is vague and hedged. It doesn't clearly define what 'company files' means or differentiate from sibling list tools like myob_account_list or myob_invoice_list. The mention of OAuth flows and businessId adds ambiguity rather than scope.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The note about 'New MYOB OAuth flows may require businessId from consent instead' hints at a prerequisite but does not state clear conditions or alternatives. No exclusions or comparisons with sibling tools are provided.

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