Add folder

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutating, non-idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds that the folder is empty and acts as a group, but does not disclose side effects, conflict behavior (e.g., above+below), or whether duplicate names are allowed. Since annotations carry the safety profile, a mid score is appropriate.

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 with the action and object front-loaded. There is no filler or redundant repetition of the tool name, so 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?

For a 5-parameter creation tool with no output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain return values, placement behavior when optional parameters are omitted, or conflict handling. However, the schema covers most parameters and annotations cover safety, so it is not wholly inadequate.

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 80%, so the schema documents path, above, below, and parent. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, and 'name' lacks a schema description, but the high coverage keeps this at the baseline of 3.

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 ('Creates') and resource ('empty layer folder (group)'), making the tool's function clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling add_image_layer, but 'folder (group)' versus image layer is implicit, so it stops short of a full 5.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_image_layer, move_layer, or set_layer. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context clues beyond the name itself, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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