List remote directory contents over SFTP with configurable entry and size limits, providing read-only access to prevent changes.
List a remote directory over SFTP, with a bounded number of entries and a bounded response size. Read-only.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| profile | No | Profile name | |
| maxEntries | No | Max entries to return (default 200, hard cap 1000) | |
| remotePath | Yes | Remote directory to list |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.9.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, and the description reinforces this and adds useful behavioral constraints: it bounds the number of entries and the response size. These extra bounds help the agent reason about output limits beyond what the annotation alone provides.
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, delivering the main action and key constraints in a single sentence. The 'Read-only.' sentence is redundant with the annotation, so it does not add new value, but it is brief and non-harmful.
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?
For a simple list operation with a fully documented 3-parameter schema and a read-only annotation, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains the listing behavior, SFTP context, and bounded output; a brief note on returned entry format or session prerequisites would improve it further, but is not critical.
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 input schema already provides 100% parameter documentation, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of bounded entries aligns with maxEntries but does not add syntax, defaults, or format details beyond what the schema already states.
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, specific operation and resource: 'List a remote directory over SFTP'. The bounded-entry and bounded-response details add concrete scope, and the verb 'list' naturally distinguishes this from sibling upload/download 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?
The description implies when to use the tool: whenever the goal is to list a remote SFTP directory rather than transfer files. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to an alternative sibling like sftp-upload-file or sftp-download-file.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.