Manage folder

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

Annotations already flag the tool as mutating and destructive. The description adds meaningful context beyond those annotations by disclosing that deleting a folder also deletes its projects and requires confirmToken. No contradiction exists, though other potential side effects are not discussed.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The action list is front-loaded, and the critical destructive warning is placed in the second sentence. Every sentence earns its place.

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 9 parameters, zero schema descriptions, and several overlapping identifiers (folder_name vs name vs new_name), the description is too sparse to support correct invocation. It does not specify which action uses which parameters, how move identifies the target and parent, or what status does. The output schema does not resolve input-side ambiguity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only explains confirmToken's role. The remaining eight parameters—folder_id, folder_name, new_name, parent_folder_id, parent_folder_name, status, and more—are left unexplained, leaving the agent unable to map actions to required inputs.

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 states specific verbs (create, rename, move, delete) tied to the folder resource, making the core function clear. It is clearly mutating compared to query siblings, but it does not explicitly differentiate from move_items or other manage_* tools, so it misses the full distinctiveness bar.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternatives are provided. The only usage hint is that delete requires confirmToken and cascades to projects, which is a precondition warning rather than a selection guide. Usage context is implied by the title and action enum, but not fully articulated.

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