List files and directories at a specified directory path to inspect available filesystem contents and identify items for follow-up actions.
[MCP:fs] List files and directories.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | Directory path relative to root |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only listing but does not disclose recursion behavior, hidden-file handling, permissions, ordering, 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 a single front-loaded sentence with little waste. The '[MCP:fs]' prefix is noise, but the core statement is efficient.
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 simple one-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It does not explain the return shape or listing behavior, but the core operation is understandable.
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 description coverage is 100%, and the single path parameter is documented as 'Directory path relative to root'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the 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 states a specific verb and resource: list files and directories. It is clearly a listing operation, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling fs__fs_read_file.
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as fs__fs_read_file. Usage is only implied by the word 'List', with no exclusions or context about when listing is appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.