storage_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds value by specifying the underlying request type (storage_list_request), output format details, and the read-only nature, which aligns with annotations. 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?

The description is two sentences, compact and efficient. The first sentence states the action and protocol, the second provides path examples and output format. No wasted words.

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 covers the return format (dirs tagged, file sizes) adequately for a simple list tool. However, it lacks details on error handling or behavior for invalid paths. Given the tool has one parameter and annotations, it is mostly complete but minor gaps remain.

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 input schema has a single parameter 'path' with no description. The description compensates by providing example values ('/ext', '/ext/subghz', etc.) and explaining the path format, adding essential meaning 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 it lists a directory on Flipper storage over BLE, with specific path examples and output format (dirs tagged [DIR], files show byte size). It distinguishes from siblings like storage_delete and storage_read through the 'read-only' tag and listing action.

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 listing directory contents but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives like storage_info or storage_stat. Given the sibling set includes multiple storage operations, more explicit guidance would be helpful.

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