list_document_folders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the auth fallback behavior (JWT fallback via env var/header/prompt) which is useful, and notes the partial rollout. However, it doesn't describe pagination, sorting order, or what happens when there are no folders, leaving some ambiguity for a list operation.

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, then expanding into rollout and auth details. The auth fallback explanation is a bit long but genuinely useful. No wasted words in the main purpose statement.

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?

This is a simple filtered-list tool with full schema coverage. The description covers purpose, scope, rollout caveat, and authentication. Missing return-format details and pagination behavior are minor gaps, but the 2026 rollout warning is especially valuable and arguably essential context for this specific tool.

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%, so the schema already documents all 4 parameters. The description adds minimal parameter-level value beyond the schema (authentication context), which aligns with the baseline 3 for full schema coverage.

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 has a specific verb+resource ('List document folders') plus a clear scope ('for an organization in IT Glue') and states the return value ('names and IDs'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_document_sections by naming the Document Folders resource explicitly.

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?

Provides clear context on when to use it (list folders where IT Glue exposes the resource, noting 2026 rollout) and details about authentication behavior including API key vs JWT fallback. This gives the agent solid guidance on prerequisites and operational context.

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