Set up a new folder inside an Arca workspace by providing the workspace ID and folder name; optionally add an icon or color for identification.
Create a new folder in a workspace
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| icon | No | Icon name | |
| name | Yes | Folder name | |
| color | No | Color value | |
| workspace_id | Yes | The workspace ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.4.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely restates the creation action and does not mention side effects, permission requirements, behavior on duplicate names, return values, or error conditions.
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 one concise sentence with no redundant content. It is front-loaded and efficient.
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 low complexity and complete parameter schema, the basics are covered. Yet the absence of any note about the return value, success/error behavior, or required workspace context leaves gaps that an agent would need to infer or discover.
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 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no further parameter-level meaning.
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 a specific verb (create), a resource (folder), and a location (in a workspace). This directly differentiates it from sibling tools like update_folder, delete_folder, and list_folders.
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 use case is implied by the action itself: an agent should call this when a new folder needs to be created. However, the description does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives or any prerequisites such as the workspace needing to exist.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.