list_previews

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that previews are 'on disk' and sorted 'newest first,' which is useful. However, it does not mention that this is a read-only operation (though implied by 'list'), the return format, or any pagination or limitation behavior beyond the implicit limit parameter. The absence of an output schema makes this more significant.

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 sentence with zero waste. It front-loads the core purpose ('Most recent preview renders on disk') and immediately clarifies ordering. Every word contributes value.

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 list tool, the description is sparse. There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must clarify what the returned items contain (e.g., paths, metadata) and any limitations. It only states the source and ordering, leaving the agent uncertain about the structure of the results and how to use them with sibling tools like read_preview_image.

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 0%, and the description does not mention the 'limit' parameter at all. The schema provides type, default, and constraints, but the description adds no meaning about what the limit controls (e.g., number of previews returned). Since coverage is low, the description should compensate, but it does not.

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 'most recent preview renders on disk, newest first.' It identifies the specific resource (preview renders) and the ordering, distinguishing it from list_exports (exports) and read_preview_image (reads a preview). The verb 'list' is explicit.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention list_exports or other related tools, nor any conditions that would make this the preferred choice. There are no exclusions or prerequisites stated.

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