folder_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only notes a prerequisite (credentials) and the protocol (IMAP), but does not describe side effects, idempotency, error behavior, or what happens if the folder already exists. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and immediately followed by the key requirement. Every word earns its place; no waste or redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity, the rich schema for parameters, and the absence of an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and a key prerequisite. It falls short of explaining return values or edge-case behavior, but it is adequate for a straightforward create operation.

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 100%, with each parameter (path, alias_username, alias_password) having a clear description in the schema. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 ('Create a folder') and a resource ('for an alias (IMAP)'), which distinguishes it from sibling folder tools like folder_update, folder_delete, and folders_list. The inclusion of 'IMAP' further clarifies the domain.

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 mentions a prerequisite ('Requires alias credentials') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions. The usage context is implied rather than explicit, with no reference to sibling operations like folder_update or folder_delete.

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