list_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It states it returns specific file details and is a read operation, but does not mention potential limitations like file type filtering or authentication requirements. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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 four sentences, each serving a purpose: stating the function, providing usage context, and listing returned fields. It is front-loaded and concise with no redundancy.

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 (single parameter, no output schema), the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, prerequisite (list_courses), returned data, and next step (download_files). It is complete for its context.

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 description adds value by indicating the parameter `course_id` should come from list_courses, which is not in the schema. With 0% schema coverage, this compensates well. However, it doesn't describe the parameter's format or constraints beyond the integer type.

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 it lists downloadable files of a course, specifies file types (PDFs, slides, notebooks), and lists return fields (filename, mimetype, size, section/activity, fileurl). It differentiates from sibling tools like list_courses and download_files by mentioning the data flow.

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 tells the user to use the `id` from list_courses and that the returned `fileurl` is for download_files, providing a clear workflow. It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool, but the context with sibling tools makes it clear.

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