List Hosting Files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safe-read profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only the upstream API reference and that it returns names rather than metadata; it does not describe pagination, ordering, empty-directory behavior, or error conditions for a missing path.

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?

Two tight sentences: the operation and its scoping constraint come first, with the API reference trailing. Nothing is redundant and every clause carries information.

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 two-parameter read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description plus annotations cover what an agent needs to call it: what it lists, what path defaults to, and that it is a safe idempotent read. Minor gaps remain around result shape and pagination, but the essential information is present.

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 100%, so both `path` and `domain` are already documented at the same level of detail the description offers. The description only restates that `path` is optional and `domain` scopes the listing, adding no syntax, format, or behavioral meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (List) plus the exact resource (file/directory names) and its scope (under an optional path in a domain's Secure Static Hosting space). An agent can distinguish this read-listing tool from siblings like delete_hosting_file and make_hosting_dir without opening any schema.

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?

Usage is implied by the purpose and by its position among hosting siblings, but the description never states when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., list_hosting_plans, get_hosting) or any precondition such as the domain having active hosting. No explicit when/when-not guidance is provided.

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