list_csv_filesLists CSV and TSV files in the allowed folder, recursively up to depth 4, and accepts an optional subdirectory to narrow results for local analysis.
List .csv/.tsv files inside the allowed directory (recursive, max depth 4).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| subdirectory | No | Optional subfolder relative to the allowed directory |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior: the file-type filter (.csv/.tsv) and the recursion bound (max depth 4), which no annotation conveys.
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?
One sentence, zero filler, with the scope and the two key constraints front-loaded. Nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.
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 read-only, single-parameter discovery tool with rich annotations, the description covers what it lists and where. The only minor gap is that it does not say what form the result takes (e.g., relative paths), and there is no output schema to compensate.
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% and the single optional `subdirectory` parameter is already documented there, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no syntax, path semantics, or default-behavior detail for that parameter.
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 ('List') and resource ('.csv/.tsv files'), plus the scoping constraint (allowed directory). It implicitly separates itself from content-oriented siblings like query_csv or summarize_csv, though it never names or contrasts them.
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?
Usage is only implied: the tool is clearly a discovery step before summarize_csv/profile_csv/query_csv, but the description never says when to use it versus those siblings or any precondition. No explicit when/when-not guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.