list_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'list files and folders' and how to specify the path, but does not mention whether the listing is recursive, whether hidden files are included, what metadata is returned, or whether any permissions are needed. This is a notable 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 concise, well-structured, and front-loaded with the core purpose. It includes a helpful example without unnecessary verbiage, making it easy for an agent to quickly parse the intended function.

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 low-complexity, read-only listing tool, the description and schema together provide adequate context. The site_id parameter's reference to list_websites helps the agent act independently. However, the absence of any output format or behavioral caveats keeps it from being fully complete.

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 already documents both parameters fully (site_id and path), including defaults and examples, with 100% coverage. The description's path usage advice largely repeats schema information, adding little new semantic value beyond the context of 'website storage'.

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 tool lists files and folders in a website's storage, which is a specific verb+resource combination. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like upload_file, delete_file, and create_folder, and the example clarifies the intended use.

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 provides clear context by explaining the root path convention and giving a natural-language example ('Show files in my website'). It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the sibling context and clear purpose make the primary use case obvious.

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