Recent files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds useful ordering and pagination behavior, but doesn't go deeper into potential nuances like external modifications (covered by openWorldHint) or whether 'accessed' vs 'modified' is prioritized. No contradiction with annotations.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action ('List'), resource ('files'), scope ('account's'), and key behavior (newest first, pagination). No redundant words.

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?

The tool is simple (list with pagination) and the description, combined with schema and annotations, is largely complete. However, with no output schema, the description doesn't hint at what fields are returned for each file, which could be useful but isn't strictly necessary for invoking the tool correctly.

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 provides complete descriptions for both limit and cursor, including default and constraints. The description only mentions 'pagination' generally, adding no semantic beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% 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 clearly states the tool lists the account's most recently accessed or modified files, with a specific ordering (newest first) and pagination. This distinctly separates it from siblings like search_files (query-based) or browse_folder (navigational).

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 the appropriate context: when an agent needs recently accessed/modified files. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the distinct purpose (recently vs. by search or folder) provides clear enough guidance for a straightforward list tool.

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