List folders

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and idempotency profile is fully covered. The description only adds that results carry UIDs and titles, which is useful but thin; it says nothing about ordering, pagination, or whether empty results are possible.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste. The resource is named first and the return contents are appended without filler.

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?

With no parameters and a full annotation set, the remaining burden is describing what comes back, and the description does name the two returned fields. It stops short of covering ordering or pagination, but for a trivial zero-arg listing tool this is close to complete.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is nothing for the description to compensate for. The mention of UIDs and titles describes output rather than input, which is harmless but not parameter semantics.

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 ("List dashboard folders") and adds the returned fields ("their UIDs and titles"), so the agent knows exactly what this produces. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_folder or list_dashboards, but the plural/list framing makes the scope self-evident.

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 statement of when to use this versus get_folder (single folder) or list_dashboards, and no prerequisites or ordering guidance. Usage is only implied by the verb 'List', which is weak guidance for a tool sitting among several list/get siblings.

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