list_dataset_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It only restates the core action and gives no information about pagination behavior, output format, auth requirements, or whether only metadata or actual file contents are listed.

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 clear sentence with no filler and the verb is front-loaded. However, it is concise to the point of being sparse, providing the minimum viable statement without supporting detail.

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?

Given two parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description omits essential context such as the meaning of 'ref', how page_size behaves, and what kind of file information is returned. It is a minimally viable description but not nearly complete enough for confident tool selection and invocation.

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%, and the description adds no meaning to either parameter. 'ref' is required but completely undefined, and page_size's default of 50 has no explanation. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 a specific action ('List') and resource ('files in a dataset'), so an agent can tell this is a read-oriented dataset file listing tool. However, it does not differentiate this from siblings like list_model_version_files or list_competition_files beyond the word 'dataset'.

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?

No guidance is given for when to use this tool versus the many sibling list_* tools, nor does it explain what kind of dataset reference 'ref' should be. Usage context is left entirely to inference.

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