box_manage_folders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates that this tool mutates folders and can delete them, but it does not disclose auth requirements, side effects, reversibility, scope limitations, or error/response behavior.

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 efficient sentence with no filler and front-loads the key actions. It earns a 4 because it is concise, though the brevity contributes to the lack of behavioral and parameter detail.

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?

This tool has a multi-action nested schema, no annotations, and no output schema, yet the description provides only a high-level summary. It does not clarify per-action requirements, folder addressing rules, return values, or error handling, leaving significant gaps for an agent to call it 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?

The schema provides no descriptions for action, folders, or any nested property, and the description does not explain how actions relate to fields like newName, newPath, or folderId. 'By path or ID' only hints at path/folderId and leaves the rest of the parameter semantics undocumented.

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 explicitly names the resource (folders) and the specific operations (create, move, rename, delete), along with the two addressing modes (path or ID). This clearly differentiates it from sibling document, search, and sharing tools, even though no sibling is named.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of when not to use it. The only implication is that folder management belongs here, but no explicit usage conditions or exclusions are provided.

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