create_folder

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

Annotations provide no read-only or destructive hints, so the description must disclose behavior. It explains what a folder conceptually is but omits effects like whether creation is idempotent, what happens on duplicate names, what the API returns, or permission requirements. The write nature is implied by 'create' but not elaborated.

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 concise and front-loaded with the clear purpose. The conceptual explanation about folder grouping adds context without excessive verbosity. The args section is cleanly formatted, though the inclusion of the 'content refresh' example twice could be trimmed.

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 create tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core mechanics but misses the config parameter and any mention of return values or error conditions. It is adequate for basic use but not comprehensive.

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?

Description explains project_id and name clearly, including source for project_id and an example folder name. However, the optional 'config' parameter is not described at all, and with 0% schema coverage, this leaves a gap in understanding the full parameter set.

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 tool creates a folder (Context) within a project to organize skills and files, distinguishing it from project-level tools by describing the grouping purpose. The verb 'create' and resource 'folder' are specific and align with the tool name.

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?

Provides a clear prerequisite: 'Call list_projects() first for the project_id.' It also explains when a folder is useful (to group related skills and files). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as when adding to an existing folder (add_skill_to_folder).

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