modx_list_media_source_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and it delivers almost nothing beyond the verb. It does not state whether listing is recursive, whether results are paginated or capped, what permissions are required, or what the response contains (names only vs. metadata such as size, type, modified date).

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is well sized for the words it uses, though the brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined economy.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and three undocumented parameters, an agent has no way to know which argument identifies the source or what to expect back. For a listing tool in a dense media-source family, the definition leaves essential calling information 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?

All three parameters (id, name, path) have 0% schema description coverage, and the description adds no clarification. It is unclear whether id and name are alternative identifiers for the same media source, whether they are mutually exclusive, or whether path is a filter or a relative subdirectory to list.

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?

"List files and folders inside a media source" names a specific verb (list) and concrete resource (files/folders within a media source), so the operation is immediately understandable. It does not, however, differentiate itself from nearby siblings such as modx_list_media_sources or modx_read_media_source_file.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus reading a single file (modx_read_media_source_file) or enumerating sources themselves (modx_list_media_sources). No prerequisites, no exclusions, and no mention of what a caller needs beforehand to make the call.

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