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

Annotations cover read-only safety, but the description adds meaningful context beyond them: permission scoping ('only shows items the user can see and kinds this token may read') and the workspace/folder visibility constraints. Doesn't discuss pagination or sizing limits for the tree.

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?

Front-loads the two modes clearly, then motivation, then the sibling routing. Dense but every sentence carries weight; slightly long.

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?

Covers both call modes, visibility scoping, and sibling routing for a read-only browse tool with a well-documented 2-param schema. Nothing essential 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% and both params are documented there, so baseline is 3. The description restates the folder-mode behavior but adds no syntax or format beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource with two clearly delineated modes (tree vs. folder contents) and describes exactly what data each mode returns (id, path, direct-item count; or kind, id, title, tags, path). Distinguishes itself from search_workspace by role.

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?

Explicitly states when to use it ('user asks what's in a folder or wants the whole shape') and names the alternative (search_workspace) with the condition selecting it ('to find one named thing').

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