Get Folder Icon

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

The description adds the specific behavioral detail that returns null when no icon is set, which is not covered by the readOnlyHint annotation. It also flags the tool as 'Experimental,' providing a caveat. The annotations already declare the safety profile, so this additional context is valuable but not exhaustive.

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 short and front-loaded: 'Read' immediately conveys the action, followed by the resource and key return behavior. Three sentences with zero fluff, each earning its place.

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 read operation with a clear annotation profile, output schema, and minimal parameters, the description covers the essential behavior (including null return and experimental status). It lacks an explicit mention of workspaceId, but the overall picture is sufficient for a safe getter.

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 schema provides a description for folderId but not for workspaceId (50% coverage). The description does not explain workspaceId or add syntax details, though it does reinforce that folderId refers to an organize folder's icon. This is adequate but not compensatory.

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 the exact action ('Read the current sidebar icon') and the resource ('an organize folder'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like update_folder_icon (write) and get_doc_icon (documents). It also specifies the null return case, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 makes it clear this is a read-only operation for folder icons, implying it should be used instead of update_folder_icon when only reading is needed. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or describe when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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