add_guest_to_folder

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

Without annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a write operation (granting access) but does not mention requirements (e.g., guest must already exist), side effects, permission dependencies, or what happens if the guest already has access.

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 very concise (one sentence) but may be too brief, lacking structure. It front-loads the action but omits necessary details, making it borderline under-specified.

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?

The description is insufficient for a tool with 3 parameters and no output schema. It does not explain the enterprise requirement, preconditions, or the effect of the action (e.g., what permissions the guest receives). More context is needed for safe and accurate use.

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?

While the schema covers 67% of parameters with descriptions (folder_id, permission_level), the description adds no extra parameter information beyond what is in the schema. guest_id lacks a description in both schema and tool description, leaving ambiguity about the expected format or type.

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 action ('Grant a guest access to a Folder') and the specific resource (Folder), distinguishing it from sibling tools like add_guest_to_list or add_guest_to_task that target different resource types.

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 only mentions 'Enterprise only' as a usage condition but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., invite_guest, remove_guest_from_folder), nor any prerequisites or exclusion cases.

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