assets_ls

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions listing, prefix filtering, and pagination, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like whether it is read-only, auth requirements, or rate limits. The description is adequate but minimal.

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 consists of two concise sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the main purpose and efficiently communicates key features.

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?

The tool has a complex input schema (nested filter object) and no output schema. The description does not explain the response format, such as the structure of returned blobs or the pagination cursor details. This leaves significant gaps for an agent.

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% description coverage, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds value by linking 'optional prefix filter' to the prefix parameter and 'pagination via cursor' to cursor/limit, helping to understand their roles.

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 blobs in a project with optional prefix filtering and pagination. It uses specific verbs ('List') and resources ('blobs'), and the context distinguishes it from sibling tools like assets_get, assets_put, and assets_rm.

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 explains what the tool does but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention when not to use it. It implies use for listing blobs, but lacks comparative context.

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