list_documents

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and idempotent. The description adds that image-kind files are not caught by text search, which is a meaningful behavioral trait about output. No contradiction with annotations.

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 brief and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by two usage tips. Each sentence earns its place, though the missing folder context is a minor structural gap.

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 read-only list tool with fully documented params and an output schema, the description is functional. However, it fails to mention which folder is listed (a crucial contextual dependency) and does not describe the return structure beyond the path hint. The usage tip is valuable but not fully complete.

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 covers 100% of parameters with concise descriptions (ext, limit, pattern, sort_by). The description adds no parameter-specific detail, staying within the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 it returns a file list in a folder, but does not clarify which folder is being referred to (no `path` parameter exists; likely controlled by `set_folder`). It does not distinguish itself from siblings like `search_documents`, so an agent may not know when to choose this over alternatives.

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 gives explicit cross-tool guidance: returned `path` values can be reused in other tools' `path` arguments, and image-kind files are excluded from text search, so `read_image` should be used. This is actionable and helps route the agent correctly.

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