Library folders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that – no mention of whether the listing is scoped to a user/library, whether it can be empty, or how results are ordered.

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?

It is a single short sentence with no padding, which is structurally fine, but the brevity here is under-specification rather than genuine conciseness – there is nothing to front-load because nothing substantive is said.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of telling the agent what a folder listing yields (folder identifiers, names, nesting?). It says nothing about the return shape or about the related move/download/delete operations that consume these folders, leaving the agent to guess.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics burden on the description. Baseline 4 applies; nothing is missing or misrepresented.

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?

States a verb ('List') and a resource ('Library folders'), so the basic operation is identifiable. However, 'Library folders' largely restates the title, and the description gives no signal to distinguish this from siblings such as axcel_library_list, axcel_folder_create, axcel_folder_rename, or axcel_folder_delete.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no indication of prerequisites (e.g. whether login is required first, given the axcel_login_* siblings). The agent must infer that this is the discovery step before folder_create/rename/delete.

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