cbs_list_local_datasets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint as true, indicating safe, non-destructive behavior. The description adds transparency by stating the return format includes 'sizes and row counts,' which is not captured in annotations. No contradictions.

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 two sentences, no unnecessary words, and front-loads the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: the first states the action, the second describes the return format.

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 simple list tool with no parameters and rich annotations, the description is largely complete. It specifies the return as a string with CSV files, sizes, and row counts. A minor gap is not stating whether file paths are included or just names, but given the output schema exists (though not shown), this is acceptable.

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?

There are zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details. According to calibration, baseline is 4 for no parameters.

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 explicitly states 'Lists all locally saved CSV datasets in the downloads directory,' which clearly indicates the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like cbs_list_datasets (likely global) and cbs_inspect_dataset_details (detailed inspection) by specifying 'locally saved' and 'CSV'.

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 implies usage for listing local CSV files but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cbs_list_datasets or cbs_search_datasets. It lacks when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations, leaving reliance on agent inference.

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