get_routine_folders

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions pagination but does not describe response format, ordering, defaults, error behavior, or whether this is a read-only operation. The agent cannot anticipate what the tool returns or how pagination behaves.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise and easy to parse.

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?

Despite the tool's apparent simplicity, the lack of annotations, parameter descriptions, and output schema leaves significant gaps. The description does not specify what a routine folder is, what fields each item includes, or how pagination works. It feels incomplete for an agent to safely invoke and interpret results.

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, and the description does not explain the parameters 'page' and 'pageSize' at all. The word 'paginated' only hints at their purpose, but there is no explicit mapping, type explanation, or format details.

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 clearly states the tool gets a paginated list of routine folders, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_single_routine_folder (single item) and get_routines (routines, not folders).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_routines or get_single_routine_folder. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions.

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