vunit_list_files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds non-obvious behavioral context: the listing is in compile order and needs no simulator. This goes beyond the schema and annotations, though it doesn't detail output format or failure modes; given the output schema and read-only annotation, this is sufficient.

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 short sentences with no filler. The core function is stated first, followed by a useful environment note; every word adds value.

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 parameterless read-only tool with an output schema, the description covers what the tool does and a key environmental constraint (no simulator needed). Nothing required to call it correctly is missing.

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 empty schema fully documents the interface. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4; there is no parameter information the description would need to compensate for.

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 specific verb ('List') and identifies the resource ('all source files') plus an ordering property ('in compile order'). It clearly differentiates from the sibling vunit_list_tests, which lists tests rather than source files.

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 phrase 'Does not require a simulator' gives useful usage context, indicating the tool works without simulator setup. However, it does not explicitly contrast this tool with alternatives like vunit_list_tests or vunit_compile, so when-to-use guidance remains implied rather than stated.

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