syncthing_remote_needed_files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that: no return shape, no pagination behavior, no note that results depend on the remote device's state, despite six parameters implying a paged query.

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?

It is short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness: a two-word fragment that omits the operation, scope, and pagination semantics an agent needs. Length is not the problem; absence of information is.

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 six-parameter, paginated, remote-state-dependent query with no output schema and no parameter documentation, the description is completely inadequate. An agent cannot know what it returns, how to page, or what folder/device refer to.

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% across six parameters, including pagination controls (limit, cursor) and optional selectors (fields, instance). The description does not explain any of them, not even which are required or what 'fields' projects, so it fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 phrase 'Remote needed files.' is a noun fragment that restates the tool name rather than stating a verb+resource operation. It vaguely distinguishes itself from the sibling syncthing_needed_files via 'Remote', but gives no clue whether it lists, fetches, or computes needed 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 guidance, no mention of alternatives like syncthing_needed_files versus this remote variant, and no prerequisites such as needing a valid folder/device pair. The agent must infer everything from the name.

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