files_list

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

The description adds the return format `{files[], pagination}`, which is helpful beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. However, it does not disclose behaviors like default filtering scope or that all files are returned if no filters are applied. The annotation already covers read-only safety, so the bar is met minimally.

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 sentences that are front-loaded with the action and resource. No redundant information. Every word earns its place.

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 read-only list tool with 5 optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides the essential return shape and scope. It lacks explicit guidance on default behavior or alternatives, but it is sufficiently complete for a basic list operation.

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 provides 100% coverage for all 5 parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds no extra syntax or format details beyond what the schema already contains. The mention of 'orders/customers' aligns with filter params but adds no new meaning.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'files' with specific scope 'attached to orders/customers'. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_orders and list_customers. The return shape is also noted.

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 (listing files) is clear from the description. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives like files_get for individual file retrieval. The context is unambiguous but lacks explicit exclusions.

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