list_document_folders

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and largely meets it: it discloses output_format variants, the save_to_file temp-file behavior returning a path for jq, and that the tool returns a JSON string list. It does not mention authentication, rate limits, or implicit scoping, but for a read-only list tool these gaps are minor.

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?

One clear purpose sentence followed by a tight, structured Args block and a one-line Returns note. Every sentence adds information; there is no filler or repetition.

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 no-required-parameter listing tool with an output schema, the description is nearly complete: all parameters, defaults, return type, and file-saving behavior are covered. It only lacks routing guidance to related document/folder tools, which is a separate usage gap rather than a schema/behavior gap.

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 descriptions are absent (0% coverage), and the description compensates fully by explaining every parameter: organization_id, parent_folder_id, page, page_size, output_format, and save_to_file. It even enumerates output_format values and notes page_size max 1000, which is more semantic detail than the raw schema provides.

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 a concrete action ('List') and resource ('document folders from IT Glue'), immediately distinguishing it from sibling list_documents (documents vs folders) and get_document_folder (plural listing vs single fetch). No ambiguity about what the tool returns.

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?

No when-to-use guidance or alternatives are given. An agent must infer from the name that this is for enumerating folders, and there is no direction toward get_document_folder, list_documents, search_documents, or get_organization_documents when a different granularity or search is needed.

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