list_workspace_folders

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions filtering, pagination, and sorting but does not disclose default behaviors (e.g., default sort order, whether trashed items are excluded by default, or error handling for invalid workspace IDs). Basic transparency is present but not comprehensive.

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 sentence that front-loads the core action and key options. Every word serves a purpose; no unnecessary 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?

Given 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It lacks details about response structure, pagination behavior, or defaults. For a complex tool, more context is needed for an agent to use it correctly without errors.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description only summarizes the capabilities without adding meaning beyond the schema. It does not provide additional context for parameters like when to use each filter.

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 tool lists folders in a workspace, with filtering, pagination, and sorting options. It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_files, list_trash, and list_workspace_files by specifically mentioning workspace and 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 implies the tool is used for listing folders with options, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternative tools like list_folders or when not to use it. No when-not or exclusion criteria are provided.

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