List Documents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds only functional details already present in the schema (sorting/filtering) and does not disclose additional behaviors like default sort order, pagination behavior, or limitations. It provides no extra transparency beyond the 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 two sentences long, with no filler or repetition. It front-loads the core purpose and then lists the key options efficiently.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are covered. The description covers the main purpose and filtering/sorting options, but it omits details like default sort order, pagination behavior, and response format selection. For a tool with 8 parameters, this is adequate but not complete for advanced usage.

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 0%, so the description carries a heavier burden. It does mention sortable fields (name, date, size, category) and filterable properties (category, tag), which helps map to the sort_by, category, and tag parameters. However, it does not explain the allowed enum values, defaults, limit/offset pagination, or response_format semantics, leaving some parameters under-explained.

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 uses the specific verb 'list' and the resource 'documents in a vault', clearly distinguishing it from sibling search tools. Mentioning sorting and filtering options further clarifies its scope.

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 clearly implies the tool is for listing documents with sorting/filtering options, which is sufficient context for most use cases. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like vault_search or vault_get_doc, so it misses the highest tier of guidance.

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