get_protected_files

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action of returning data without describing any side effects, reading conventions, or error behavior. It does not add transparency beyond the obvious read-only nature implied by 'Return'.

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 concise sentence with no filler, but it is arguably too terse. It is structured adequately for a simple getter, yet it could be expanded slightly to clarify the meaning of 'protected path configuration' without becoming verbose.

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 tool has low complexity (no params, no output schema), but the description remains ambiguous about what exactly is returned and why it matters. It does not explain what 'protected' means or when this tool is relevant, leaving an incomplete picture for the 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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific details, but none are needed since the input schema is empty. The absence of parameters is already clear from 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 uses a clear verb ('Return') and resource ('protected path configuration'), but the term itself is vague and undefined. It is not clear whether this returns a list of file paths, a configuration object, or something else. It is unique among siblings, but the description does not explicitly distinguish it from potential alternatives.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool, what prerequisites exist, or how it relates to sibling tools. There is no mention of alternatives or exclusions, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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