List local directory

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the operation's non-destructive nature. The description adds only that the listing happens on the 'connected computer' through the 'Desktop Commander execution core', which gives environmental context but does not disclose recursion behavior, sorting, or output format.

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 a single front-loaded sentence, the description is concise and minimally redundant. The phrase 'through the Desktop Commander execution core' adds environmental context without bloat, so every part 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?

The tool is simple and its read-only annotation covers safety, but with no output schema and no mention of recursion depth or how this differs from file-info/read siblings, the description is adequate but leaves gaps. An agent calling it correctly would need to infer depth semantics and output shape.

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 description provides no information about the two parameters. The schema documents 'path' as an absolute or allowed path (50% coverage), but 'depth' is left to its name and numeric constraints alone, and the description does not compensate for that gap.

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 specific verb 'List' with the resource 'files and directories on the connected computer', making the tool's function immediately clear. This separates it from siblings like read_file (content) and get_file_info (metadata), so an agent can distinguish without opening the schema.

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 gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and names no sibling alternatives. The intended use is only implied by the verb and resource, leaving an agent to infer when to choose this over read_file or get_file_info.

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