files_corpus_list

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only says 'Enumerate corpora with row counts,' lacking disclosure on whether it is read-only, whether authentication is needed, or any side effects. This is insufficient for safe agent usage.

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?

At 4 words, the description is too short to be useful. While concise, it sacrifices necessary detail; it does not earn its place as it fails to inform adequately.

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's simplicity (listing corpora with counts), the description covers the basic output. However, it omits context about what 'corpora' are, which database is used, and how results are structured, making it only minimally complete.

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%, so the description should compensate by explaining the parameters. It does not mention 'timeout' or 'database' at all, leaving agents without context for these fields beyond the schema defaults.

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?

Description states 'Enumerate corpora with row counts,' which gives a basic verb and resource but fails to specify what 'corpora' refers to in context. It does not clearly distinguish from sibling tools like files_stats or files_search, leaving ambiguity.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or when not to use it.

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