database_folder_open

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

No annotations are present, so the description must bear the full burden. It does not mention whether the tool changes the current folder, its return value, or error handling (e.g., if folder does not exist).

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, with two sentences that front-load the purpose. It could benefit from a brief note on return value or edge cases, but it is 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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is fairly complete but lacks details on return behavior and error conditions. Slightly below ideal.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description adds some meaning: folder_name opens a named subfolder, go_to can be 'root'/'parent'. However, it does not clarify that go_to only accepts these two values or what happens if both are used.

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 specifies a clear verb ('Navigate') and resource ('the database folder tree'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like bin_tree (list tree) or bin_set_current (set current bin). The purpose is 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?

It explains when to use folder_name (to open a named subfolder) and go_to (for 'root'/'parent'), but does not address scenarios where both are provided, potential failures, or when to prefer this tool over bin_set_current or bin_tree.

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