switch_folder

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It simply says 'Switch to different folder' without mentioning side effects (e.g., changing the active folder context for future operations), error handling for invalid folders, or return value. The verb 'switch' hints at a state change but provides no meaningful detail.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the action, and contains no unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter tool, even though it lacks detail in other dimensions.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description is too sparse. It does not mention the impact on subsequent operations, whether a folder must exist, or what happens after switching. Without annotations or an output schema, the description should provide more context to enable correct usage, but it falls short.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage for the single 'folder' parameter with a description and examples. The tool description adds no additional semantic value beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Switch to different folder' uses a specific verb and resource, and the action is clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, but no other sibling tool performs folder switching, so the name and description are sufficient for basic identification.

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 or how it relates to alternatives like get_folders. It lacks any context about prerequisites, such as needing to list folders first, or about how it affects subsequent email operations.

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