List shares inside the Nextcloud workspace

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds modestly by noting it uses the connected account's permissions and "never creates shares or publishes file content," but adds nothing about output shape, pagination, or what happens when the path is outside the workspace.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the read-only scope constraint. No wasted text, though the second sentence duplicates annotation-covered safety facts rather than spending words on the undocumented parameters.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations carry the safety profile. The remaining gap is the two undocumented parameters and the ambiguous empty-path default, which leaves the agent guessing on invocation.

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 0% and both parameters (path, include_subfiles) are bare titles with defaults, yet the description says nothing about either one. With a low-coverage schema the description is obligated to compensate, and it does not — notably it never explains what include_subfiles recurses over.

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 names a specific verb and resource ("Read existing share metadata") and confines scope to "items inside the user's private workspace root," which is enough for an agent to distinguish it from the file-oriented siblings like list_files or search_files. It stops short of 5 because it never uses the word "list" to describe the enumeration behavior implied by the tool name.

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 a scoping constraint (private workspace root only) but no statement of when to call this versus alternatives, and no mention of prerequisites such as resolving a path first. Nothing tells the agent whether an empty path has special meaning.

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