list_directory

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('List') but lacks details on permissions, error handling, output format, pagination, or whether it's read-only. This is a significant gap for a tool with no structured safety hints.

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 that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple tool, with zero waste.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like what the output looks like (e.g., list format, error cases), permissions needed, or how it differs from siblings. For a tool with no structured context, more detail is warranted.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'path' parameter well-documented in the schema itself. The description adds minimal value beyond implying the path is for listing contents, but it doesn't provide additional context like path validation or examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('files and directories'), and it specifies the scope ('in a given path'). However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like 'search_files' or 'read_file', which prevents a perfect score.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention scenarios like browsing directory contents versus searching for specific files, nor does it reference sibling tools such as 'search_files' for filtered queries or 'read_file' for file content access.

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