list_artifacts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but no further behavioral traits are disclosed (e.g., recursion behavior, error handling, output format). This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation support.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant information. It conveys the core purpose and an example without wasting words.

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 listing tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate but not complete. It does not state what the returned artifact list looks like or how repo is resolved without a schema-derived understanding. The example helps, but edge cases are unaddressed.

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 schema documents repo but not pattern (50% coverage). The description adds meaning to pattern by explaining it as a glob and giving an example, which partially compensates. It also ties both parameters together in context, but does not fully explain repo resolution 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?

The description states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('artifact files') with scope ('in a repo matching a glob pattern') and provides a concrete example pattern. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_repos and list_apps.

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 intended use case is implied: use when you need to list artifact files matching a glob pattern. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or exclusions, and no alternatives are mentioned. The schema hints at using list_repos for repo discovery, but that guidance is not in the description.

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