files_info

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 states that setting 'detailed=True' yields a full response, implying a default partial response, but it does not disclose read-only nature, authentication needs, rate limits, or error behavior.

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 extremely concise at two sentences, front-loading the core purpose. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, especially given the number of undocumented parameters.

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 6 parameters, no annotations, and no explanation of the output schema (despite its existence), the description fails to cover pagination or response details, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to correctly invoke and interpret 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, meaning the schema provides no parameter descriptions. The description only explains the 'detailed' parameter; the other five (count, cursor, limit, page, file) are left unexplained, leaving their semantics ambiguous.

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: 'Get information about a file.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like files_list (which lists files) and files_upload (which uploads files).

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 hints at usage for the 'detailed' parameter ('Set detailed=True for full response'), but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like files_info vs files_remote_info or files_comments_delete.

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