set_display_folder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It adds useful behavioral details like the backslash syntax for nested folders and the grouping purpose, but it does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether empty string clears the folder, any persistence behavior, or error conditions). It is adequate but not rich.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by a concrete example. Every sentence contributes to understanding the operation and the folder path syntax, with no wasted words.

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 setter tool with 4 required parameters and no output schema, the description provides enough context to understand the operation, including the folder hierarchy example. It does not cover the clearing behavior (empty string) in the description, but that appears in the schema. Overall, it is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 covers 75% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds contextual meaning by clarifying the folder concept and nesting syntax, and identifies target as measure/column. It does not map all parameters to the description, but it complements the schema without redundancy.

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 action ('Set the display folder') and the target ('a measure or a column'), with examples of use. It distinguishes this from sibling tools by focusing specifically on display folder assignment, which is unique among the 'set_*' 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 implies usage by explaining what display folders are and how to structure them with backslashes, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or describe any preconditions or exclusions. It provides clear context but no comparative guidance.

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