Delete SEVERAL assignment folders PERMANENTLY in ONE call (subtrees are deleted too; assignments inside are kept but lose their folder). Prefer archive_folder, which is reversible.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| folders | Yes | Folders to delete (id, name or full path each) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Even though destructiveHint=true already signals destructiveness, the description adds meaningful behavioral context: multiple folders are deleted in one call, deletion is permanent, subtrees are removed, and contained assignments survive but lose their folder association. This goes well beyond the annotation and helps the agent predict side effects.
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 compact and front-loaded: the critical facts (permanent, multi-delete, one call) appear first, followed by behavioral side effects and the safer alternative. No sentence is wasted.
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 destructive tool with clear annotations and no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: what is deleted, what is preserved, irreversibility, and the safer alternative. No critical operational detail 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 the schema already documents that the 'folders' parameter accepts an array of ids, names, or full paths. The description adds the notion that multiple folders are expected and that they are assignment folders, but it does not need to explain parameter mechanics further.
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 names a specific verb ('Delete'), a specific resource ('assignment folders'), and key scope qualifiers ('SEVERAL', 'PERMANENTLY', 'in ONE call'). It also clarifies edge behaviors ('subtrees are deleted too; assignments inside are kept but lose their folder'), which distinguishes it clearly from singular or reversible alternatives like delete_folder and archive_folder.
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 explicitly recommends archive_folder as the reversible alternative, giving clear guidance to prefer it when reversibility matters. It implies that delete_folders is for cases requiring permanent bulk deletion, though it does not fully spell out all when-not-to-use conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct target resource/action, and the descriptions are unusually explicit about differences (e.g., 'Distinct from the watchlist', 'Separate list from list_tags'). A few pairs are still easy to confuse without careful reading: delete_folder vs delete_folders differ only by singular/plural, and the three download-URL tools (get_post_download_url, get_asset_download_url, get_my_account_post_download_url) plus the category/tag families require attention to pick correctly.
The snake_case verb_noun pattern is followed consistently throughout (list_*, get_*, create_*, update_*, delete_*, set_*, tag_*). Minor deviations: archive_folder and archive_my_accounts also perform restore despite their names, delete_folder/delete_folders split one operation by cardinality, and tag_posts/tag_my_account use a different verb style than the set_* family for metadata mutations.
At 56 tools, this far exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many,' even though the server spans multiple subdomains (watchlist, analysis, assignments, folders, my accounts, assets, Drive, categories/tags). Obvious consolidation candidates exist — delete_folder/delete_folders, the three download-URL getters, and the parallel list_my_account_* listers — and the sheer surface is heavy for an agent to navigate.
Core workflows are thoroughly covered with no dead ends: watchlist → analyze → assign → folder → track → approve has full lifecycle support, including reversible archive vs permanent delete choices. Minor gaps exist but are work-aroundable: no create/update for my accounts or models (app-side OAuth/admin only), no way to delete a viral post or a post note, and asset upload only happens in the app.
