list_files

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It only says 'list available markdown files' and does not mention sorting, recursion, inclusion of hidden files, or whether only paths are returned. This is minimal coverage of behavioral traits.

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 no unnecessary words. For a simple list operation, this is appropriately concise and every word earns its place.

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 is simple, has an output schema, and parameters are fully documented in the schema, so the description need not explain return values or parameter formats. However, it omits usage context relative to sibling tools, such as clarifying that this lists filenames while search_markdown searches content, which slightly reduces completeness.

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 fully covers both parameters with clear descriptions, including syntax examples for pattern, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The tool description itself adds no parameter meaning, but the schema carries the load, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 action ('List') and resource ('available markdown files'), which distinguishes it from siblings that read or search file contents. However, 'available' is slightly vague and does not explicitly specify the scope (e.g., current folder/workspace).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_markdown or read_file, and no prerequisites are mentioned. It is a bare statement without context for selection.

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