syncthing_ignores

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds zero behavioral context — no indication of scope, that results are per-folder, pagination, or what an empty result means. The one word 'Ignores' could even be misread as a mutating action, only corrected by the annotations.

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?

This is not conciseness but under-specification: a single dangling word with a period carries no useful information and cannot be considered front-loaded content.

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 output schema, 0% parameter coverage, and no annotations beyond safety hints, the description leaves the agent with no way to call this tool correctly or interpret results.

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 0% and the description mentions nothing about the three parameters (folder required, fields, instance). For a tool with an undocumented folder/instance/fields triple, the description should compensate but does not.

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 is a single word, 'Ignores.', which merely restates the tool name without stating a verb+resource or what is actually listed/returned. An agent cannot tell from this that it deals with Syncthing folder ignore patterns, nor distinguish it from siblings like syncthing_ignore_defaults or syncthing_folder_config.

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 guidance, no mention of alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions. Nothing routes the agent between this tool and the many sibling tools.

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