Recent files

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

The readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations already convey that this is a safe read operation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those annotations: newest-first ordering and the explicit instruction to keep following the cursor until none is returned.

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 with no filler: the first defines purpose, scope, and ordering; the second gives the necessary pagination instruction for complete traversal. Every sentence 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 zero required parameters and detailed schema descriptions, the definition is mostly complete: it covers what is listed, the ordering, and how to paginate through all results. There is no output schema, so a note on item shape would add value, but the absence does not prevent correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the limit parameter is already richly documented, including the adaptive page-size behavior. The description adds little parameter-level meaning beyond reinforcing the cursor loop, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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'), a clear resource ('the account's most recently accessed or modified files'), and adds ordering ('newest first') and pagination. This cleanly distinguishes it from generic listing siblings like list_files and search_files.

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 a clear context: use this when you need recently accessed or modified files for the account. It does not explicitly name excluded alternatives, but the recency-focused framing is enough to guide tool selection among siblings.

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