notion_list_local_files

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool lists files in two specific stores and describes the source addressing forms. It does not mention side effects or edge cases, but as a read-only listing action the core behavior is clear.

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 front-loaded with a purpose statement, then uses a bulleted list for the location options, and ends with a short sentence about the filter. It is well-structured and every sentence contributes value.

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?

The tool has only two optional parameters with defaults and an output schema, and the description covers its purpose, both locations, and the filter. The cross-MCP context about google-accounts-mcp adds completeness, making the description sufficient for correct invocation.

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?

The schema has zero descriptions, but the description fully explains the 'location' parameter with its two possible values and their meanings, and the 'filter' parameter as an optional substring filter. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 clearly states the tool lists files available to notion-mcp by scheme, and explains the purpose of verifying a handoff before attaching to Notion. It distinguishes between 'files' and 'shared' locations, which sets it apart from sibling tools like notion_list_files_on_page.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool—verifying a handoff before attaching—and explains the two location schemes including which files are in each. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool versus other listing tools.

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