List files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile needs no restating. The description adds one genuinely new trait — that results are paginated — but omits ordering, default page size, and total-count behavior. Given the annotation coverage, this is adequate but thin.

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?

A single sentence with zero padding, which is front-loaded and easy to scan. But the brevity here reflects under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness — the same sentence length buys almost no actionable information.

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 optional parameters, no required args, no output schema, and no mention of filtering or ordering, the description leaves an agent guessing about core behavior. The presence of account, variant_id, and include implies filtering capability that the description never acknowledges.

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 80%, so the schema already documents per_page defaults, account, include, and variant_id. The description only echoes that results are paginated and adds no syntax or semantics beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a clear verb and resource ('Returns a paginated list of files'), which distinguishes it from the singular get_file sibling at a glance. However, it says nothing about scope or filters, so it is only marginally more informative than the title 'List files'.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no indication of when a caller should reach for list_files versus get_file. The pagination note describes output, not usage conditions.

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