Get Dropbox Folders

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the permission model (reads the same folder listing a student client uses, unlike the gated submission/download tools) and enumerates the returned fields (folder ID, name, due/start/end dates, submission type, visibility, rubric attachment). Auth behavior and payload shape are both covered.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then return fields, then usage routing and the access nuance. The field enumeration is somewhat dense but earns its place given there is no output schema; no sentence is filler.

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 one-parameter read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return contents, downstream usage, and the permission caveat. An agent has everything needed to select and call it correctly without opening anything else.

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?

Only one parameter, courseId, and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents it fully. The description adds only the implied 'for a course' framing and no format or constraint details beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all assignment/dropbox folders for a course') and immediately scopes the audience (instructor or TA). It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling submission/feedback tools, which operate on a single folder rather than listing folders.

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?

Gives explicit routing guidance: use this to discover folderId values before calling get_dropbox_submissions, get_dropbox_user_submissions, get_dropbox_feedback, or get_rubrics_for_object. It also pre-empts a likely question by noting the tool is not gated to instructor/TA accounts the way those siblings are.

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