list-files

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

Given no annotations, the description provides behavioral details: it's a GET request with no body, returning raw storage file list (file_name, size, last_modified). It clarifies it's safe and read-only. It does not mention error conditions or limits, but enough for an agent.

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, front-loading the purpose and then adding context. Every sentence adds value, no fluff.

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 description explains the use case, return fields, and nature of data. For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, it is nearly complete. Minor omission: no mention of pagination or ordering, but not critical.

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 schema covers the sole parameter with description 'Namespace name. Must exist and belong to your account.' The tool description adds no additional parameter information beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 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 'List file objects stored in document storage (S3) for a namespace', specifying a specific verb (list) and resource (file objects) with a namespace context. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list-namespaces or fetch-text-data.

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 includes guidance on when to use ('after upload-url uploads') and when not ('not indexed text documents'). It also notes the method ('GET only; no body'). However, it could be more explicit about when to prefer this tool over alternatives.

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