list_folders

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

With no annotations, the description is the sole source of behavioral information. It adds the important nuance that providing parent_id lists subfolders, but it does not disclose recursion behavior, ordering, or response content. This is minimal but non-redundant context.

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, direct sentence with no filler. Every word adds value, making it highly concise and front-loaded.

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 listing tool, the description captures the core purpose and the optional parameter's effect. It omits return-format details, but the tool's low complexity makes this acceptable and nearly 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 schema already fully describes parent_id as 'Parent folder UUID (omit for root)', and the description's 'subfolders' phrasing aligns with that. The tool description adds no meaning beyond the schema's coverage, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('List') with the resource ('folders') and clarifies the root-versus-subfolder behavior via the parenthetical. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like create_folder or get_folder_tree.

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 parenthetical 'or subfolders of a parent folder' gives clear context on when to use the tool with parent_id versus listing root folders. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, stopping short of full guidance.

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