onedrive_list_folder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List' implies a read-only operation, and the guidance about needing an exact path is useful, but it does not mention recursion behavior, failure modes, authentication requirements, or any side effects. The description is adequate but minimal.

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 compact and well-structured: purpose first, then parameter semantics, then discovery and sibling guidance. Every sentence adds value and none are redundant.

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 one-parameter list tool with an output schema present, the description covers the core purpose, the parameter, and routing to sibling tools. It does not explain return contents or edge cases, but the output schema handles that. Overall it is complete enough for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 0% for the single parameter, so the description must compensate. It defines folder_path as a path string with concrete examples ('Documents/Projects' or 'Stock Investor Accelerator'), adding meaning beyond the bare schema. It could go further with format details but is sufficient.

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 opens with 'List items in a OneDrive folder by path,' a specific verb + resource + method. It also names sibling tools (onedrive_list_root, onedrive_read_file) to distinguish this tool's scope, so an agent can immediately tell what it does vs. alternatives.

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?

Explicitly says to use onedrive_list_root or onedrive_search first when the exact folder_path is unknown, and directs the agent to onedrive_read_file for reading discovered files. This clearly covers when to use this tool and when to prefer alternatives.

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