list_docqa_files

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose what the tool returns (e.g., file metadata, pagination, permissions). The description only states 'list files', missing essential behavioral traits.

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?

Very concise, single line with two languages. Lacks front-loading of key info, but no wasted words. Could be cleaner by separating languages.

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?

No output schema and no annotations. The description fails to explain what the tool returns or any behavioral details. For a list tool, this is incomplete.

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 coverage is 100% with one parameter assistant_id described in schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'asistente Doc-QA', which is already in the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

Clearly states it lists files uploaded to a Doc-QA assistant, using verbs 'Listar' and 'Lista' with specific resource 'archivos de Doc-QA'. Distinguishes from siblings like upload_docqa_file, delete_docqa_file, and list_docqa_assistants.

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?

Implies usage context (list files for a specific assistant) but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No mention of alternatives or prerequisites.

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