list_dir

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool supports but not how it behaves in practice—such as default recursion behavior, whether hidden files are excluded by default, error handling, or what the response contains. The read-only nature is implied by the name but never stated.

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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence is a compact feature list. It is slightly redundant with the schema's parameter descriptions but does not waste 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?

An output schema exists, so return values do not need to be described. However, the description lacks usage context, such as how recursion depth interacts with recursive, whether glob matching is relative to the listed directory, and when this tool should be preferred over the glob sibling. It is adequate for a basic listing tool but leaves some call-related ambiguity.

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%, so the input schema already documents path, max_depth, recursive, glob_pattern, and include_hidden. The description's feature list roughly maps to these parameters but adds no new semantic depth beyond what the schema already provides.

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 verb and resource: "List directory contents." It also enumerates supported filtering capabilities, which distinguishes it from file content operations like read_file and write_file. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling glob tool, which also deals with path-matching filters.

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?

No guidance is given about when to choose list_dir over glob, search_files, or other siblings. The description only lists features; it does not state scenarios, exclusions, or alternatives.

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