policies_list_folders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions pagination and the fields returned, which is adequate for a read-only list operation. It does not disclose any other behavioral traits like rate limits or authentication, but for a list tool this is acceptable.

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 three short sentences, each adding valuable information: purpose, required parameter, and return value fields. No redundant or vague language. Ideal conciseness for an AI agent.

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 that this is a simple list tool with pagination parameters and no output schema, the description completely explains what the tool does, what it requires, and what it returns. It is sufficient for an agent to understand and correctly invoke the tool.

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 input schema fully describes all three parameters (100% coverage). The description adds context about pagination and the return fields, but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'List policy folders for a customer' which is a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools (create, delete, get, update) by being the only list operation among folder-related tools.

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 description implicitly indicates usage for listing folders, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. However, given the sibling tool names, an agent can infer when to use this vs. other folder operations.

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