filesystem_scan

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing safety and behavioral traits. It only says 'broad inventory', which implies a read operation but does not explicitly state read-only, performance implications, or what data is returned. Minimal disclosure, but not outright contradictory.

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?

It is a single sentence, which is concise, but it is under-specified and does not front-load the core action or key constraints. The brevity comes at the cost of usefulness, so it does not earn its place.

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?

A complex tool with 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no parameter descriptions in the text is completely inadequate. The description fails to explain what the tool returns, how parameters interact, or any operational context, making it nearly impossible to use 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?

The description makes no mention of any of the four parameters (roots, max_depth, max_files, max_hash_bytes). Given schema description coverage is 0%, the agent has no clue what these mean or how to set them. This is a critical gap.

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 states 'broad inventory' without a clear verb or subject, remaining vague about what is inventoried (filesystem? files? directories?). It does not distinguish from siblings like filesystem_references or bigbang_scan, and the name alone carries most of the meaning.

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?

Provides clear context: use for onboarding/maintenance, and explicitly forbidden for state reconstruction of admitted work. This gives both when and when-not, though it names no alternative tool, so it stops short of full guidance.

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