Agent Workstation

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List directory

list_dir

Read-onlyIdempotent

List files and folders in the configured workspace, with optional recursive depth, sorting, hidden/ignored inclusion, and entry limits for bounded directory exploration.

Instructions

List directory entries inside the configured workspace.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`path`	No	.
`sort`	No	name
`max_depth`	No
`recursive`	No
`max_entries`	No
`include_hidden`	No
`include_ignored`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	Yes
`path`	No
`error`	No
`entries`	No
`warnings`	No
`truncated`	No
`output_bytes`	No
`output_lines`	No
`truncated_by`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Sep 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds only the workspace confinement, while omitting traversal behavior, entry limits, hidden-file handling, and other operational details beyond what annotations cover.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The structure is clean, though the extreme brevity borders on under-specification for a 7-parameter tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 7 optional parameters, 0% schema descriptions, and an overlapping sibling (list_files), the description is incomplete. Output schema and annotations cover returns and safety, but invocation guidance and parameter meaning remain largely absent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 0% description coverage across 7 parameters, and the description mentions none of their meanings, defaults, or formats. It does not compensate for the schema documentation gap at all.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('directory entries') and scope ('inside the configured workspace'). It is clear, but it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling list_files, so sibling differentiation is missing.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, and no exclusions. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name and the vague workspace scope.

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