get_folder_contents

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states a generic read operation. It discloses no behavioral traits such as permissions, pagination, error handling, or whether recursive contents are included. The output schema exists but the description does not leverage it to explain return structure.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action. However, it may be too brief given the lack of other guidance, but conciseness is maintained.

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 simple retrieval tool with an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It explains the core purpose but lacks detail on what 'contents' includes (files vs. subfolders) and edge cases. The sibling tools list is large, but the description does not address where this tool fits.

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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description only vaguely maps 'folder_id' and 'matter_id' to 'specific folder' and 'on a matter'. It does not explain formats, constraints, or how these parameters relate beyond the obvious. Minimal added value over schema.

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 clearly states the action: 'get the contents of a specific folder on a matter.' It specifies the resource (folder contents) and context (matter). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tool 'get_root_folder_contents', missing an opportunity to clarify scope.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_root_folder_contents' or other list tools. There is no mention of prerequisites or context for invocation.

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