Create a folder

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses key constraints: title must be unique and max 128 characters. However, it does not describe what happens on duplicate titles, whether the folder is created empty, or what a successful creation returns.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then adds the essential constraints. There is no filler or redundant phrasing.

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 one-parameter create tool with no output schema, the description provides the necessary context: what is created, its purpose, and the title constraints. It is not fully complete regarding error behavior, but the tool is simple enough that the description covers most invocation needs.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the title parameter and its uniqueness/length constraints. The description repeats this information without adding new semantic detail beyond the broader purpose of organizing cron jobs.

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: 'Create a new folder to organize cron jobs into.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling operations like create_job and makes its role in the folder/job hierarchy explicit.

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 phrase 'to organize cron jobs into' implies this tool is for creating a container before adding jobs, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_job or update_folder. No exclusions or alternative routing is provided.

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