create_template_folder

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

Annotations already indicate mutability (readOnlyHint=false) and non-idempotence. The description adds fine-grained behavioral details: authentication via API key, max 10 concurrent requests, and respect for read-only/dry-run modes. This complements the annotations without contradiction.

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 appropriately sized and well-structured: first sentence states purpose, then usage guidance, authentication, parameter details, and return value. Every sentence adds value with no repetition or fluff.

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?

Despite the tool being simple, the description covers all relevant aspects: purpose, usage, authentication, rate limits, parameter semantics, and return value. It references related tools and accounts. Given the output schema exists (not shown), the return description is sufficient.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains both parameters: name with an example and account with its optional nature, default behavior, and reference to list_accounts. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 tool creates a folder for organizing templates, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like list_template_folders, update_template_folder, and create_template by explaining the folder's role and how to assign templates via folder_id.

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 provides clear usage context: group related templates and assign via folder_id. It references list_template_folders for browsing, which helps with workflow. However, it does not explicitly exclude when not to use it or list direct alternatives beyond browsing.

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