fs_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Lists directory contents' without explaining pagination, the need for an active SSH session, default limit (100), or the format of the returned listing. This is minimal for a tool with four parameters.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence. It is front-loaded and avoids extraneous details. While longer context might be helpful, for a simple listing tool this level of conciseness is appropriate.

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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It fails to mention important context such as the need for an established SSH session, pagination behavior, or the structure of the returned directory listing.

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 100% (all four parameters have descriptions). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, aligning with the baseline score of 3.

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 'Lists directory contents' uses a specific verb ('lists') and resource ('directory contents'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like fs_read (reads file content) or fs_stat (file statistics). It leaves no ambiguity about the tool's primary function.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. While the sibling set implies directory listing is distinct, the description does not explicitly help the agent decide when to choose fs_list over other tools.

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