files_remote_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It merely states 'get information,' implying a read-only operation, but does not detail what information is returned, permissions required, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to assess safety and 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 a single sentence, which is concise but under-specified. It fails to provide necessary detail about parameters, usage, or behavior, making it less effective despite its brevity.

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 lack of parameter descriptions and no usage guidance, the description is incomplete. While an output schema exists (not shown), the description does not cover when to use the tool, what 'remote file' means, or how the parameters relate to the operation.

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 0% description coverage, leaving parameters external_id and file completely unexplained. The description does not add any meaning beyond the field names, failing to compensate for the schema gap.

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 'Get information about a remote file,' specifying the action (get) and resource (remote file). It distinguishes from sibling tools like files_remote_add but does not explicitly differentiate from files_info.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or when not to use it. The description lacks context for choosing this tool among many file-related siblings.

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