List files in a cloned repository

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: the handle must come from repo_clone, and listing can be scoped via sub-path and glob. No contradictions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by optional parameters and a necessary prerequisite. Every phrase earns its place with no redundancy.

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 simple list files tool with an output schema, the description covers the prerequisite (handle from repo_clone) and options (path, glob). It does not explicitly state whether the listing is recursive, but the glob pattern '**/*.yaml' implies recursive behavior, and the output schema likely clarifies return structure. No major gaps.

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%, with each parameter (handle, path, glob) fully described in the input schema. The description restates these options but adds no new semantic detail beyond examples already present in the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific action and resource: 'List files in a previously cloned repository (by handle)'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like repo_read_file and repo_grep, which operate on file contents. The optional path and glob filters are additional specificity.

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 gives a clear prerequisite via 'Use the handle returned by repo_clone' and explains optional scoping/filtering with path and glob. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, but the context is strong enough for an agent to understand when this tool applies.

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