termix_hosts_get_all_foldersRetrieves all folders for the authenticated Termix user, enabling efficient organization and access to saved host groups.
Get all folders. Retrieves all folders for the authenticated user.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the meaningful context that results are scoped to authenticated user's folders, but does not disclose pagination, ordering, folder hierarchy, or other behavioral details.
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 very short and readable, with the key scope detail ('for the authenticated user') included. However, the first sentence merely repeats the title, making it slightly redundant; a single combined sentence would be tighter.
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-parameter, read-only, idempotent list action, the description together with annotations is largely sufficient. It clearly identifies the resource and user scope; missing details such as response shape or folder sorting are not critical for invoking this simple 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?
The tool has zero parameters and the input schema is empty, so there is nothing for the description to add about parameter semantics. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameter documentation burden exists.
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?
Description states a clear verb ('Get all folders') and resource, and adds the scope 'for the authenticated user.' It is distinct from sibling tools in the hosts domain, though it does not explicitly say 'host folders' to differentiate from folder-listing tools in other domains like snippets and credentials.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and does not mention any exclusions or prerequisites. It only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the name and sibling set.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.