create_folder

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It reveals one key trait (recursive parent folder creation) but omits other important behaviors: whether it fails or succeeds if the folder already exists, error handling for invalid paths, permission requirements, and what the output schema returns. The added parent-folder detail is valuable but insufficient for complete transparency.

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 of just 6 words. It places the core verb ('Create') and resource ('a folder') first, then adds the essential detail about parent folders. There is zero wasted text; every word earns its place.

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 tool with one simple parameter and an output schema (not shown here but exists), the description covers the primary action and the key behavioral nuance. It does not explain error states, path validation, or idempotency, but given the low complexity and presence of an output schema to handle return values, the description is reasonably complete.

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 describes the 'folder' parameter as 'Path of the folder to create.' The description adds meaning by stating 'including parent folders if needed,' which implies the parameter can include deep paths and the tool will create intermediates. This enriches the schema definition and clarifies the tool's behavior beyond the raw schema text.

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 creates a folder ('Create a folder') and adds the critical detail about recursive parent folder creation ('including parent folders if needed'). This verb+resource specification differentiates it from sibling tools like delete_folder (destruction) and write_file (content creation).

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 (e.g., write_file might also create folders implicitly, or run_command could be used). There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context for selecting this tool among the many file-related siblings. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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