create_folder

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior — the dry-run default — though it doesn't say what the dry run returns, whether names must be unique, or what auth scope is needed.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and then the modifier; nothing is wasted. It is close to under-specified rather than merely concise, but the structure itself is clean.

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?

A mutation tool with no output schema, 0% schema coverage, and no documented return value or dry-run semantics. The description doesn't say what a dry run produces or how to actually commit the creation, which an agent needs in order to complete the workflow.

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 0% and only the title 'Name' exists, yet the description says nothing about what the folder name must be (uniqueness, length, forbidden characters). The dry-run statement merely restates the schema's default:true rather than adding semantic value.

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?

Specific verb ('Create') + resource ('collection folder'), so an agent immediately knows the operation. It does not differentiate from siblings such as add_to_collection or rename_folder, and 'collection folder' scoping (which service/account) is left implicit.

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?

'Dry-run by default' is an implicit usage hint — the agent should preview before committing — but there is no explicit when-to-use, no prerequisites (e.g. list_collection_folders to check for duplicates), and no named alternatives among the many folder siblings.

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