make_folder

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses idempotent behavior ('If the folder already exists, nothing changes and it still succeeds'), parent-folder creation, permission requirements ('Needs Allow edits'), the private-folder restriction, and the return value (the folder's path). These are meaningful behavioral traits not encoded in the 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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and then covers idempotency, alternatives, permissions, privacy, and return value in a compact, information-dense paragraph. Every sentence contributes useful selection or invocation guidance.

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?

Given the tool is a non-destructive mutation with an output schema, full parameter descriptions, and annotations, the description supplies everything else an agent needs: idempotency, prerequisite permission, alternative tools, and the fact that a path is returned.

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 path, folder, and private thoroughly. The description largely repeats those meanings, such as the path example and the private=true condition, rather than adding substantial new semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter documentation.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Make a new, empty subfolder') and explicitly distinguishes the tool from create_note and move_note. An agent can identify exactly what this tool does without opening the schema.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance ('use this only when the person wants an empty folder') and names the alternatives, create_note and move_note, with the conditions that select them. It also states the private=true condition and the 'Needs Allow edits' prerequisite.

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