remarkable_mkdir

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

Annotations only provide readOnlyHint (false), so the description carries full burden. It thoroughly discloses behavioral traits: mode differences, the need for xochitl restart in SSH mode, the effect of defer_restart, and the creation delay. No contradictions with 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 well-structured with clear XML tags (usecase, instructions, parameters, examples). Every sentence adds value—no fluff or repetition. It is appropriately sized for a tool with three parameters and mode-specific behavior.

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's complexity (multiple modes, three parameters, one required), the description covers all necessary context: mode availability, restart behavior, parent path defaults, and batch hint. An output schema exists but is not needed to explain return values; the description is complete without it.

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%, so the description must compensate fully. It explains all three parameters in detail, including defaults, mode-specific behavior, and side effects (e.g., defer_restart sets refresh_pending). The examples show typical usage but do not edge cases.

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 uses a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('a new folder'), and distinguishes this tool from siblings like remarkable_upload and remarkable_delete. The <usecase> tag clearly states the tool's primary function.

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 <instructions> section explicitly describes when to use the tool, including mode-specific behavior (SSH vs cloud) and a clear exclusion: 'Not available over the USB web interface.' It also references the sibling tool remarkable_refresh for batch operations, providing guidance on when to use alternatives.

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