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 only mentions 'retrieve detailed information' without specifying what details are included (e.g., metadata, permissions, children), or any behavioral traits like read-only idempotency. For a simple retrieval tool, more transparency would benefit.

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?

Single sentence, 11 words, no fluff. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given no output schema and one parameter, the description is minimal. It could hint at return format (e.g., 'including name, path, and metadata') to help the agent. With many sibling tools, more detail would improve completeness.

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% with a single parameter 'folderId' described as 'The unique identifier of the folder'. The description adds no extra meaning beyond mentioning 'by its ID'. 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?

The description clearly states the action ('retrieve') and the resource ('detailed information about a specific folder'), with the context 'by its ID from ZeroDrive'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_folders (which lists folders) and delete_folder (which deletes).

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 implies usage when a user needs folder details by ID, but no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives (e.g., list_folders for all folders) or when not to use. No prerequisites or context are provided.

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