list_library_folders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description's additional note that it lists 'all public' folders adds scoping behavior. It also discloses that the return includes folder IDs and names, which is useful given no output schema. No contradictions with annotations.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and no filler. Every sentence contributes either the action, the output, or the prerequisite.

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 single-parameter list operation with good annotations, the description fully covers purpose, output, and usage context. The relationship to get_library_folder_calls and list_workspaces gives adequate integration guidance. No output schema exists, so the description appropriately covers return content.

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 workspaceId well-described including the hint to use list_workspaces. The tool description repeats this hint but adds no new parameter semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the burden.

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 ('List') with a clear resource ('public Gong call library folders') and scope ('for a workspace'). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explaining the output's purpose ('to use with get_library_folder_calls'), making it clear this is a lookup tool for folder IDs.

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 clearly states a prerequisite ('Use list_workspaces to find workspace IDs') and provides downstream context ('to use with get_library_folder_calls'). It doesn't explicitly contrast with alternative tools like list_calls, but the context makes the intended use unambiguous.

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