folder_list_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Lists files in the opened folder' without revealing details such as recursion, file type inclusion, hidden files, or output format. This lack of context reduces 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 sentence with no wasted words. However, while concise, it could be more informative without sacrificing brevity. It is front-loaded with purpose but lacks necessary detail.

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 has one optional parameter and no output schema, the description should explain the output format (e.g., list of filenames or paths) and clarify the 'opened folder' state. Without these, an agent might misuse the tool or misunderstand results.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a single parameter 'glob' described as 'Filter, e.g. *.md'. The description adds no new meaning beyond the schema: it implies filtering is optional, but that is already clear. Baseline 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 lists files in the opened folder. It uses a specific verb ('lists') and resource ('files in the opened folder'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like folder_open or document_get_content.

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 implies the tool is for listing files in the currently opened folder, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., folder_open to change the folder, or document_search to find content). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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