list_folders

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden; it does convey that results include special-use roles, which hints at the read-only listing behavior. However, it says nothing about whether folders are returned hierarchically, their ordering, or permission/auth requirements for the mailbox.

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?

One front-loaded sentence naming the verb, resource, and notable result content with no wasted words.

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 values need not be described, and the zero-parameter surface keeps the burden low. The only mild gap is that folder hierarchy and ordering are not mentioned, but that is plausibly covered by the output schema.

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?

Zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to compensate for; the baseline for a param-less tool applies.

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?

Specific verb (List) plus resource (IMAP folders) with a qualifier naming what the results include (special-use roles such as Drafts, Sent, Trash, Junk). An agent can distinguish it from most siblings, though no explicit contrast is drawn with the near-neighbor folder_status.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no preconditions, and no alternatives among the folder-related siblings (folder_status, create_folder, rename_folder, delete_folder). Usage is only inferable from the name.

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