list_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It only states the operation is a listing (implying read-only) but omits details like whether the index is maintained across calls, error behavior if no index is set, or any side effects. Minimal behavioral context.

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 that is direct and wastes no words. While it could be considered too minimal, it does not include irrelevant details. Front-loads the core purpose.

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 tool has moderate complexity with three optional parameters and no output schema. The description lacks details on what happens when no index is selected, default behavior for omitted parameters, or the format of returned paths. Adequate but incomplete.

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%, with all three parameters described in the schema. The description adds 'repository-relative' which clarifies the path format but does not enhance parameter meaning beyond schema defaults. Baseline 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 lists repository-relative file paths from the selected index. It uses specific verb 'list' and resource 'file paths', distinguishing it from siblings like search, index_status, or clear_index which serve different purposes.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., an index must be selected) or when not to use it. Sibling names provide some context, but the description itself lacks usage instructions.

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