List entries in an executor workspace folder (UNC listfiles)

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: it discloses the type-guard and pcall wrapper, the exact error object when listfiles is missing, the error-on-failure behavior, and the 1000-entry truncation cap with a 'truncated' flag. These are precisely the failure modes an agent needs before invoking.

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?

Front-loaded with the key semantic distinction, but the tail is boilerplate-heavy and redundant: 'Safety: read-only' restates destructiveHint=false and readOnlyHint=true, and the Signature/Phase/Capabilities block largely duplicates schema and annotation data.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates fully by specifying the return shape { path, files, count, truncated } and both error shapes. For a read-only listing tool this covers everything needed to call and interpret it.

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 the schema already documents path, threadContext, and timeoutMs. The description repeats the signature and the empty-string-root tip, which is already in the schema description, so it adds little beyond the baseline.

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+resource+scope: list files and subfolders directly inside a folder in the executor's workspace, returning paths. It explicitly disambiguates from the Roblox game side and from sibling file tools, so an agent can identify it without opening the 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?

Gives useful context (pass empty string for the workspace root, requires the UNC listfiles function, phase=observe) but never states when to choose this over siblings like read-file, ws-list, or verify-path-exists, nor any when-not condition. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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