create_folder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds one meaningful behavior detail—that subfolder paths use the server delimiter—but does not disclose behavior for duplicate folder names, permissions, or whether intermediate folders are created automatically.

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 one concise sentence with no filler. The primary verb and resource appear first, followed immediately by the most important parameter guidance.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it tells the agent what to pass and how to express subfolders. Minor edge cases like existing folders or permission failures are not mentioned, but they are not essential for a correct basic 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining that the single 'name' parameter should include the folder path and that subfolders are separated by the server delimiter, with concrete examples like 'INBOX/Clientes'.

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 a specific action and resource: "Cria uma pasta" (creates a folder). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings, but sibling names like delete_folder, rename_folder, and list_folders are sufficiently distinct to avoid confusion.

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 description gives useful context about using the server delimiter for subfolders, but it does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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