Create View Map folder

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-destructive, non-idempotent write operation in a closed world. The description adds useful behavioral details: the parent defaults to the View Map's top folder, after controls sibling ordering, and the output is {folderId}. It still does not disclose failure modes or whether duplicate folder names are permitted, which keeps it from a 5.

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 front-loaded with the core action and follows with parent default, ordering, output, and next step in three compact sentences. Every clause carries actionable information, and nothing is redundant or buried.

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 create-folder tool with rich schema coverage and clear annotations, the description is complete enough: it covers the default parent, optional ordering, output identifier, and follow-up workflow. No output schema exists, so the inline {folderId} note is sufficient. An agent has what it needs to call the tool correctly.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by specifying that parent defaults to the View Map's top folder and that after is an optional sibling placement, neither of which is stated in the property descriptions. It also clarifies the output shape, which helps the agent understand the result.

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 specific verb and resource: creates a folder in the View Map to organize saved views. It distinguishes itself from navigator-item operations by naming the target container and the follow-up action move_navigator_item. An agent can identify the tool's effect and scope without opening the schema.

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 default parent behavior and the optional after placement, and points to move_navigator_item as the next step. However, it does not say when to use this tool versus creating other folder types or versus other View Map operations, nor does it state prerequisites. Usage is implied by the purpose but not explicitly bounded.

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