make_folder

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-readonly, non-destructive, non-idempotent operation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: the change is logged, undo can remove the folder while empty, and the return includes the folder path and change id.

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 compact and front-loaded, opening with the core action and immediately following with prerequisites, alternatives, behavioral notes, and return values. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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 mutation nature, annotations, output schema, and sibling tools, the description covers prerequisites, naming constraints, rename alternative, undo behavior, and return values. An agent has enough context to invoke it correctly.

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 all three parameters, including path parent-existence and vault examples. The description adds operational constraints around the path but does not provide additional parameter-level detail beyond the 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Create one new, empty folder.' It also scopes the operation to an 'open vault that may be changed,' making clear this is a mutating folder-creation tool rather than a file write or rename.

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 explicitly states prerequisites: the parent folder must already exist, each level must be created in turn, and the name must be unused. It also names the alternative for renaming: 'Use move to rename a folder.'

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