vibekit_list_files

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only states the action 'list' without disclosing details such as whether the listing is recursive, how directories are represented, or what errors may arise (e.g., invalid appId). The read-only nature is implied but not explicitly stated, and output format is not mentioned.

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?

At just nine words, the description is highly concise and front-loaded. It states the action and target in a single sentence with zero waste, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description should note what the returned list contains (e.g., file names, paths, whether directories are included). It does not, leaving the agent to infer the response shape. For a simple list tool, this is adequate but with clear gaps.

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 fully documents both parameters (appId as 'App ID or subdomain slug' and path as 'Directory path to list (default: root)'), providing 100% coverage. The description itself adds no additional parameter semantics, but it does not need to because the schema is complete. This is the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 uses the verb 'List' and identifies the specific resource: 'files in an app's workspace directory.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like vibekit_read_file (which reads a single file) and vibekit_list_apps (which lists apps). The purpose is unambiguous.

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 use for inspecting an app's workspace files, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like vibekit_read_file or vibekit_file_changes. No exclusions or alternative references are given, so the usage context is only implied.

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