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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false; the description goes well beyond that by explaining irreversibility, requiring user confirmation, disclosing the ownership restriction, clarifying that is_visible=false only collapses (the folder stays listed), and warning that in-app deletion also destroys every template inside.

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?

Capabilities are front-loaded in the first sentence, the safety warning follows, and per-parameter notes are compact and scannable. Every clause adds decision-relevant information; nothing is restated from annotations or schema.

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?

Output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the description still covers safety, ownership limits, parameter meaning, and the out-of-scope delete path. An agent has everything needed to decide whether to call it and how to fill the payload.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden and does: id is a cat_… handle from list_library_categories, parent must be a root folder handle of the same owner and type, is_visible=false means collapse-but-stay-listed, and name maps to the rename operation. The parent constraint (same owner and type) is genuine meaning added beyond the string type.

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?

Opens with the three concrete operations it performs on a specific resource: rename, re-parent, or collapse a library folder. It also rules out the delete case by naming where deletion lives, so an agent can distinguish it from create_library_category, list_library_categories, and any delete path without reading a sibling schema.

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?

Gives explicit preconditions and prohibitions: changes are irreversible so the agent must state the change and get approval first, Nolio's own folders cannot be modified, and deletion must happen in the app. It even names list_library_categories as the source of the required id handle.

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