import_folder_tool

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

The description lacks behavioral details beyond the core action. It does not disclose side effects (e.g., file creation, metadata updates), permissions needed, error handling, or any constraints. Without annotations, the agent has insufficient behavioral context.

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 extremely brief (one sentence) but fails to convey essential information. It is underspecified rather than concise, lacking detail that is necessary for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 absence of parameter descriptions, usage guidance, and behavioral transparency, the description is severely incomplete. The existence of an output schema does not compensate for the lack of input and usage context.

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?

The description provides no information about the three parameters ('folder', 'cluster_slug', 'dry_run'). With 0% schema description coverage, the agent cannot infer the meaning, format, or purpose of these inputs beyond their names and types.

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 states a specific verb 'walk and ingest' targeting a resource 'local folder' and 'non-DOI files', clearly indicating what the tool does. It differentiates from siblings by implying it handles folder ingestion, which is distinct from other sibling tools like 'add_paper' or 'search_papers'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or comparison to other import or ingestion tools among the siblings.

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