list_media_folders

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the burden of signaling behavior. The word 'List' implies a read-only operation, and the parent folder scoping is disclosed. However, it does not mention whether results are paginated, sorted, or only include direct children when parentId is provided, and no output schema exists to fill that gap.

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 compact and front-loaded. The first sentence states the action and scope, and the second sentence provides the practical use case. Every word contributes value with no redundancy.

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 listing tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, this description is nearly complete. It explains the main use case and the key scoping option. A brief note on return shape or pagination would improve completeness, but an agent can likely invoke this tool correctly without it.

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 schema already covers the single parameter fully, including the meaning of parentId and the instruction to omit it for top-level folders. The description essentially restates this same information, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema; the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List media folders in the workspace.' It also clarifies the optional scope ('under a parent folder') and distinguishes the tool's purpose by connecting it to discovering a folderId before uploads or moves. This clearly separates it from sibling tools like list_media or create_media_folder.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool ('to discover a folderId before uploading or moving assets') and explains the optional parentId behavior. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the intended workflow is evident from the text.

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