list_folder_assets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool lists auto-generated export manifest assets, implying a read-only operation. However, it doesn't disclose permission requirements, error behavior, or whether the manifest preview is complete, so transparency is moderate.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and followed by a practical usage tip. No wasted words.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and usage context. It doesn't describe the response format, but that's not required given no output schema. Sibling tools like export_package provide context for its role.

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 has one parameter (folder_id) with no description, and the description doesn't explicitly explain the parameter format. However, the tool name and description make it clear that folder_id refers to the target folder. It doesn't add much value beyond what's inferable.

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 clearly states the tool lists assets that Workato would auto-generate into an export manifest for a folder, with examples (recipes, connections, lookup tables). This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_recipes or list_connections, which list those resources generally.

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 explicitly notes this is useful before export_package to see what's in scope, giving a clear when-to-use context. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the phrase 'before export_package' implies it's a pre-export scoping tool, distinct from general list tools.

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