List Attachments

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. Description adds behavioral context: returns sorted list of relative paths and per-extension count summary. It clarifies scope ('beyond notes/canvases/Bases'). 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?

Three sentences: first states action, second output, third use cases. No wasted words. Front-loaded with core purpose.

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?

No output schema, but description adequately describes return format (sorted list + count summary). Lacks mention of limit's effect on count or pagination, but is sufficient for a list tool.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond schema for limit and extension. It mentions output structure but not parameter details.

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 enumerates every non-markdown file in the vault, listing specific file types (images, PDFs, audio/video clips). It uses specific verb 'enumerate' and resource 'non-markdown file', distinguishing it from siblings like list_notes or list_bases.

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 provides explicit use cases: 'audit assets, find duplicates by name, or pick targets for find_unused_attachments.' This guides when to use, though it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives beyond the sibling reference.

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