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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description repeats 'READ-ONLY' and 'changes nothing'. It adds scope context ('not files') but no new behavioral details such as pagination, limits, or response format beyond what annotations already convey.

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 safety profile, but 'READ-ONLY' and 'Returns data, changes nothing' are redundant with each other and with annotations. It is still concise and every remaining sentence 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?

For a single-parameter read-only list tool with full annotation coverage, the description plus schema fully explain what the tool returns, what it excludes, and how to list files instead. No critical information needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema documents workspace_id fully. The parameter description adds semantic value by clarifying that it returns only document folders/collections and not files, which goes beyond the bare 'Workspace ID' label and helps the agent set correct expectations.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List document folders (not files)'. It clearly distinguishes the tool's scope from file-related siblings, and the input schema reinforces this by noting it returns 'document_folders (document folders/collections) only' and points to po_documents_search for files.

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 schema parameter description explicitly says 'Use po_documents_search with query="*" to list documents', naming the exact alternative and condition. This gives the agent unambiguous when-to-use guidance versus the main sibling tool.

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