List Folders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint, so 'Read-only' adds nothing structured data hasn't said. The description does add the return shape, but leaves open whether the listing is flat/recursive across subfolders and whether results are paginated — the key behavioral ambiguities for a folder lister.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the core capability and return fields front-loaded before the alternative routing sentence. Nothing could be cut without losing information.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly compensates by naming the returned fields, which is enough for an agent to decide to call it. Minor gap: no statement about folder nesting depth or result size limits, which matters for a listing tool in a large course.

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 coverage is 100% and the course_id property description already explains the numeric-string format and points to list_courses. The description only narrows scope to a course's Files area, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List every folder in a course's Files area') and enumerates the returned fields (path, file count, ID), which lets an agent distinguish it from get_folder (single folder) and get_folder_tree (combined tree). No ambiguity about what the call produces.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to get_folder_tree when a readable combined folder+file outline is wanted, giving a concrete selection condition. It does not, however, contrast against get_folder for single-folder lookups, so one sibling relationship is left to inference.

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