sort

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the resulting sort order, which is useful, but never states whether this mutates persisted ordering, whether it is reversible, or what permissions/scope (local disk, remote, project) it applies to.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the ordering rule is the payload and is stated immediately. Brevity is appropriate, though it borders on under-specification rather than true conciseness.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but for a mutation-style tool with zero annotations and an undocumented required parameter, the definition omits mutation semantics, reversibility, and target scope. It is too thin for reliable invocation.

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 the sole parameter is just typed string with title 'Folder'. The description's 'a folder' adds no path format, naming convention, or ID-vs-path distinction, so it contributes nothing beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (sort) and resource (folder) and even describes the resulting order (subfolders first, then A-Z), which is more than a tautology. It does not differentiate itself from ambiguous siblings like organize_tabs or tree, so it falls short of a 5.

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, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as tree or organize_tabs. The agent must infer from the name alone that this reorders a folder's contents.

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