list_printer_files

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Over FTPS' is a useful transport detail, but it omits everything else an agent needs for a network-bound operation: authentication expectations, behavior when the printer is offline, error/timeout semantics, and whether the listing is recursive or limited to the target directory.

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 that contains no filler or repetition. It is efficient, though the brevity contributes to the missing usage and behavioral detail noted elsewhere.

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 simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is minimally viable: it conveys the operation and transport. It falls short on what the listing returns (names only vs. size/date metadata) and on the omitted-printer_id case, which an agent must resolve to call it correctly.

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 50%: printer_id is documented in the schema, but 'dir' has no description and defaults to '/'. The description does not clarify that dir is a path on printer storage, whether it is relative or absolute, or what happens when printer_id is omitted with multiple printers configured.

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 (files on the printer's storage), which is clearer than a tautology and clearly distinct from delete_printer_file or upload_file. However, it never names or contrasts those sibling tools, so differentiation is only implicit from the noun '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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisite that a printer must be configured/reachable, and no pointer to sibling tools like upload_file or delete_printer_file that operate on the same storage.

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