mkdir

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds meaningful context beyond those annotations by stating that existing folders are reused, existing files are rejected, and the folder's existence is verified after creation.

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 a single, tightly structured sentence with no filler. The creation behavior is front-loaded, followed by verification and existing-file/folder semantics.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value details are not needed. The description covers creation, idempotency, existing-folder reuse, file rejection, and verification, though it omits behavior for missing parent directories or permission errors.

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 description coverage is 0% for the single path parameter. The description compensates partially by requiring an absolute path, but it does not explain path syntax, allowed roots, or other formatting details.

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 states a specific verb and resource: create a Netdisk folder. It also specifies the absolute-path constraint and the verification behavior, making its purpose clear against siblings like list_files or file_info.

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 clearly indicates when it is used—creating a folder—and gives key conditional behavior: existing folders are reused and existing files are rejected. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the context is sufficiently clear.

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