protect_list_files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's mention of listing files is consistent. It adds value by describing the return structure (array of records with fields: name, type, originalName, path) and the context of clips for G4 Doorbell screens, but does not cover potential behaviors like pagination or errors.

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, information-dense sentence that covers the tool's function, supported type, output format, and documentation reference. No wasted words, and the key information 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one required parameter, annotations present, output schema exists), the description is complete. It provides functional purpose, input constraint, output structure, and a documentation reference, leaving no obvious 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?

The schema already describes the 'fileType' parameter, but the description adds context about the only supported value ('animations') and its purpose (clips for G4 Doorbell screens), enhancing 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 tool lists files of a given type, with specific mention of the only currently supported type ('animations'). It distinguishes itself from sibling list tools (e.g., list_cameras, list_users) by being the only one for files.

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 when listing animation files for G4 Doorbell screens, and explicitly notes the limitation to 'animations'. However, it does not provide explicit when-not-to-use or compare to alternatives, which is acceptable given the tool's unique purpose among siblings.

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