imap_create_folder

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden and does meaningful work: it warns that parent folders may be auto-created and that success does not guarantee a new folder was made. It does not cover authentication, permission failures, or server-dependent path delimiter behavior, but the two disclosed traits are the most important call-time behaviors.

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 dense sentences with no filler: purpose, key behavior, and return semantics. The most decision-relevant information is front-loaded.

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 parameter-light create tool, the description covers the purpose, the main gotcha (parent auto-creation), and the tolerance for existing folders. It lacks a precise return shape and error conditions, but those are not essential for selecting and invoking the tool 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?

All three parameters already have schema descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by giving folder path examples and explaining the auto-create behavior of the folder parameter, but it adds nothing for accountId or accountName 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a new IMAP folder/mailbox.' It also clarifies distinctive behavior (auto-creating parents, idempotent success), which separates it from non-mutating siblings like imap_list_folders or imap_folder_status.

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 intended use is evident: whenever an IMAP folder needs to be created. It gives useful context about auto-creation of parents and success even if the folder exists, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to alternatives such as checking with imap_list_folders first.

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