delete_folders_folder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. 'Delete folder' implies a destructive operation, but it fails to specify critical details such as whether deletion is permanent or reversible, what permissions are required, if there are rate limits, or what happens to contents of the folder. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's 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 extremely concise with just two words, 'Delete folder', which is front-loaded and wastes no space. However, this conciseness comes at the cost of under-specification, but per the scoring rules, it earns a high score for brevity and structure alone.

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?

Given the tool's destructive nature (implied by 'delete'), lack of annotations, no output schema, and minimal parameter documentation, the description is severely incomplete. It does not provide enough context for safe or effective use, such as error handling, return values, or operational constraints, making it inadequate for a tool with potential side effects.

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 input schema has one parameter 'name' with 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not add any semantic information about this parameter. It does not explain what 'name' refers to (e.g., folder name, identifier, path), its format, or constraints, leaving the parameter's meaning and usage unclear.

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 'Delete folder' restates the tool name 'delete_folders_folder' without adding specificity. It lacks details about what resource is being deleted (e.g., a folder in a particular system or context) and does not distinguish it from sibling tools like 'delete_share_folder__id_' or 'delete_workspaces__wid__profiles', which also involve deletion operations.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not specify if this is for deleting a folder by name versus by ID (as in sibling tools like 'delete_share_folder__id_'), nor does it mention prerequisites, exclusions, or related operations like 'post_folders_folder' for creation or 'patch_folders_folder' for updates.

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