List folders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive/non-open-world, so the safety profile is covered; the description reinforces it with 'Read-only.' Beyond that it discloses non-obvious data semantics — parent id null at top level, path includes the reader's own description text, and the count is of items held *directly* (not recursive). No pagination, scale, or ordering information is given.

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?

Three tight sentences: what it returns first, then the shape of each folder, then how to use the ids and the safety note. No filler and nothing buried at the end that an agent needs up front.

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 zero-param, read-only listing tool with a full annotation set and an output schema, the description supplies everything needed: scope (reader's tree), hierarchy semantics, field meanings, and cross-tool linkage. Return-value details beyond that are covered by the output schema.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing schema-wise to disambiguate and the baseline applies. The description spends its words on returned field semantics (id, parent id, path, direct item count) instead, which is the useful equivalent here.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'List the reader's folder tree,' plus a clarifying equivalence to the category set driftnet sorts into. That distinguishes it from siblings like driftnet_get (retrieve one item), driftnet_create_folder (mutation), and driftnet_search (query items).

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?

'Use the ids with driftnet_move, driftnet_search and driftnet_recent' explicitly routes the agent to the downstream tools that consume this output, giving clear context for when to call it. It stops short of stating exclusions or prerequisites (e.g., call before saving if you need a folder id), so it is not a full when/when-not guide.

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