tealfabric_list_documents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It says the tool lists items but does not disclose return shape, pagination, sorting, recursive behavior, permissions, or whether it is purely read-only. These gaps matter for a tool with no output schema.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and no filler. Every word adds value. The one slight redundancy ('documents/files') does not materially hurt clarity.

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 output schema and no annotations, the description adequately states the core purpose but omits details about the response format and listing behavior. That leaves the agent with some uncertainty about what exactly will be returned.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both `path` and `tenant_id` well. The description adds only the high-level context that this is about browsing package files, which does not meaningfully extend the parameter semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate here.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('documents/files in a Tealfabric documents directory'). It also states the primary use case ('browsing package files'), which separates it from document operations like download, upload, or metadata retrieval among the siblings.

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?

Directly states when to use the tool: 'Use for browsing package files.' This gives clear contextual guidance, even though it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions. For a simple listing tool this is sufficient to route an agent.

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