List Gamma Folders

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, etc. The description adds value by detailing the return structure (items, total, hasMore, nextOffset) and the example, which clarifies behavior. No contradictions.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (what, why, PARAMETERS, RETURNS, EXAMPLE). Front-loaded and no unnecessary words. Could be slightly more concise by integrating the example.

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 simple list tool with good annotations and schema coverage, the description adequately covers purpose, integration hint, and return format. Complete for its complexity level.

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 covers all three parameters (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description's PARAMETERS section omits response_format but mentions it in the example, adding minor value. Redundant for limit and offset.

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 tool lists Gamma folders and mentions their use for organizing content. It differentiates from siblings like gamma_list_themes by focusing on folders. Not a perfect 5 because it doesn't explicitly contrast with other list tools.

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 explains that folder IDs can be used with gamma_generate, providing context for use. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives beyond that hint.

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