tree

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Show the live bookmark tree' implies a non-mutating read, but it never states that it is read-only, has no side effects, requires no special permissions, or whether 'live' means it reflects real-time changes. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a notable gap.

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 the core action first and the scoping detail second. No wasted words.

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 described, and the description covers the one parameter's two modes. It is nearly complete for a simple read tool, missing only explicit read-only/no-side-effect confirmation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, and it does: it explains that the folder parameter scopes output to a single folder and that omitting it returns the whole bar, and even gives a concrete example ('WeatherOps'). This adds real meaning beyond the bare string 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?

The description states a specific verb (Show) and resource (live bookmark tree), clearly indicating a read/inspection operation. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from read-oriented siblings like search, read_this, or snapshots, so it stops 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?

The phrase 'whole bar, or one folder like "WeatherOps"' implies the two usage modes but never states when to prefer this tool over search, read_this, or snapshots. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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