Scan Path

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

The description declares the tool as 'read-only' and mentions writing a CSV snapshot, but lacks detail on potential side effects (e.g., admin elevation triggers, timeout behavior, file overwrite behavior). Without annotations, more behavioral context would be beneficial.

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 concise sentences, no redundant information. Each word adds value, and the purpose is front-loaded.

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 is brief for a tool with 10 parameters and no output schema. It omits details like return value (e.g., path to CSV), error conditions, prerequisites (WizTree installation), and performance expectations. This leaves significant gaps for an agent.

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 coverage is 90% (9 of 10 parameters have descriptions), so the schema already provides parameter semantics. The description adds overall context but does not enhance individual parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 verb ('Run WizTree CSV export') and the resource ('drive or folder'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like analyze_csv and compare_csv by specifying it produces a CSV snapshot.

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 implies usage for scanning a path and producing a CSV, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like top_entries or compare_csv. No when-not-to-use conditions are stated.

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