List Site Directory

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description does not contradict these. It adds useful behavioral details: returns file names, types, and sizes, and clarifies that the path is relative to the site root, which goes beyond the annotations.

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 concise and front-loaded with the primary action in the first sentence. Each sentence adds value (scope, path constraint, return types), with no unnecessary words.

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 listing tool with detailed annotations and schema, the description covers the essential behavior: listing, path, and return contents. It lacks specifics like recursion depth or error handling, but overall it is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 coverage is 100% as both parameters have descriptions. The tool description only restates that the path is relative (already in the schema) and doesn't add new parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 function: 'List files and directories in a Local by Flywheel site directory.' The verb 'List' and resource are specific, and it distinguishes itself from siblings like read_site_file (reads a single file) and search_site_files (searches) by focusing on directory listing.

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 clear context on when to use the tool: to enumerate files/directories with a path relative to the site root. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the scope is well-defined and the example path guides usage.

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