wrike_get_folder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It merely restates the function ('Get a specific folder or project by ID') and provides no additional behavioral details such as whether the operation is read-only, what data is returned, or any permission requirements.

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 concise sentence with no redundant words, which is efficiently front-loaded. However, it is so minimal that it omits useful context, so it stops short of a perfect score.

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?

This is a simple 2-parameter get operation with no output schema and no annotations. The description does not explain return values, whether the result includes both folders and projects, or any notable behavior. It is too terse to be fully complete for an agent.

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 100% — both 'folderId' and 'fields' have descriptions. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so per the rubric the baseline of 3 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Get'), identifies the resource ('folder or project'), and specifies the key parameter ('by ID'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like wrike_list_folders or wrike_get_folder_tree.

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 phrase 'by ID' implies this is for fetching a single, known folder/project, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives or any exclusion criteria. Context is only implied, not stated.

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