sd_list_collection_contents

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It mentions the non-parsing behavior, explains the collection path semantics ('Empty = root'), includes a context parameter for progress reporting, and states the return structure. It lacks error handling or sort order details, but for a listing tool this is adequate.

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 well-structured with clear sections (PURPOSE, WHEN TO USE, WHEN NOT TO USE, Args, Returns). Each line adds value without redundancy, and the format is front-loaded with the core purpose before usage guidance.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, appropriate use and alternates, all parameters, and the return format, including the dict keys ('collection_path', 'file_count', 'files', 'subcollections'). It is complete for a listing tool with no annotations and simple schema.

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 0%, so the description must define parameters. It does so fully: collection as 'Collection name/path (relative to data_path). Empty = root.' and limit as 'Maximum number of files to return,' exceeding schema information. It also documents the ctx parameter, which is not in the schema.

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 with a specific verb and resource: 'List files and subcollections in a collection.' It also adds the distinguishing scope 'without parsing document contents,' which differentiates it from document-parsing siblings like sd_get_document_by_id.

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?

Explicit WHEN TO USE and WHEN NOT TO USE sections provide clear guidance, naming specific alternatives: get_file_info for metadata, search tools for keyword search, and get_document tools for full details. This is a model example of when-to-use vs alternatives.

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