file_list

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

The description discloses a meaningful behavioral trait: output is sorted with directories first. However, with no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does not specify the exact return format (e.g., names vs. full paths, hidden files, or error handling).

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 filler. It front-loads the action and adds only the key behavioral detail about sorting, earning every word.

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 low-complexity tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the primary purpose and the notable sorting behavior. It could be slightly more complete by detailing the return structure (e.g., names only), but it is sufficient for straightforward listing.

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 fully describes the only parameter 'path', including its default value. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 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 function: 'List entries in a directory.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like file_read or file_search by focusing on directory enumeration rather than file content or search.

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?

Usage is implied through the description (use to list directory contents), but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over siblings like file_info or file_search. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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