list_changed_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation via 'List', but it omits whether this calls an external service, what prerequisites exist, or what the output format looks like. The description provides minimal behavioral detail beyond the action itself.

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, focused sentence with no fluff. It front-loads the key action and context, making it easy to scan.

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?

With 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far too sparse. It fails to explain parameter roles, expected return format, or how this tool relates to siblings. This is a completely inadequate description for a tool of this complexity.

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 only 20%, and the description adds little beyond what the schema already provides. 'For a version upgrade' hints at from/to, but appName, platform, and packageName are unexplained in both the schema and description, leaving the agent without meaningful parameter understanding.

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 action ('List files changed'), the resource ('React Native Upgrade Helper / rn-diff-purge'), and the context ('for a version upgrade'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_file_diff and get_upgrade_diff by focusing on listing files rather than fetching diffs or summaries.

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 phrase 'for a version upgrade' gives clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide exclusion criteria, so it relies on the agent to infer from sibling names when this tool is appropriate.

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