List Project Folders

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It accurately states the action (listing all folders) and adds a clarifying note with '(groups)'. However, it does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation or describe the return format, which is a minor gap given the simplicity of the tool.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action, the resource, and a brief clarifying parenthetical, achieving maximum informational density in minimal space.

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, parameterless list operation, the description is fully complete. It clearly indicates what the tool does and requires no further elaboration. The lack of an output schema is acceptable here because the return value (a list of folders) is self-evident from the tool's purpose.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema trivially covers 100% of them. The description correctly implies no arguments are needed. No additional parameter explanation is required or possible, meeting the baseline expectation for a parameterless tool.

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 the specific verb 'List' and clearly names the resource 'project folders', adding the explanatory '(groups)' and clarifying their purpose in organizing projects. This fully distinguishes it from sibling tools like ticktick_get_projects (which lists projects, not folders) and ticktick_create_project_folder (which creates folders).

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 provides clear context by stating these folders are 'used to organize projects', implying this tool is for retrieving the grouping structure. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is so clear that an agent would naturally select it when folder-level data is needed, especially alongside create/delete/move folder siblings.

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