Retrieve a paginated list of files with metadata, and apply filters to locate specific files by criteria.
List files with metadata and optional filtering
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number (default: 1) | |
| limit | No | Files per page (default: 10) | |
| filter | No | Filter criteria |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.7Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies read-only listing but does not state pagination behavior, response format, result limits, or any side effects. The description adds minimal behavior beyond the name and schema.
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 no wasted words. However, its brevity comes at the cost of operational detail, making it efficient but minimally informative.
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?
There is no output schema, no annotations, and a nested filter object, so the description carries a heavy burden. It does not explain return values, pagination details, filter semantics, or how this differs from sibling file-related tools.
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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema already provides; the 'optional filtering' phrase only reinforces the filter parameter without explaining its structure or accepted criteria.
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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('files'), and mentions metadata and optional filtering. It distinguishes from sibling file operations like delete_file and get_file_info, though it does not explicitly differentiate from other list-style tools.
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_file_info or list_items. The phrase 'optional filtering' hints at usage but provides no context, prerequisites, or exclusion criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.