list_folders

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral transparency burden. It does disclose the output scope ('every folder') and includes return details ('path and note count'), which is helpful. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, has no side effects, or what happens with empty folders or errors, leaving some gaps.

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 concise sentence that communicates the core purpose and key output fields. It is front-loaded and free of filler, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context: it enumerates folders and specifies the returned fields. It could enhance completeness by noting whether folders are nested or whether the count includes subfolders, but for a basic listing tool it is largely 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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. The description does not need to explain parameters, and the baseline for no-parameter tools is 4. It appropriately focuses on the return value instead, adding meaning about what the result contains.

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's function: 'List every Apple Notes folder with its path and note count.' It uses a specific verb (List) and resource (Apple Notes folder), and the inclusion of 'path' and 'note count' distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_notes, which lists notes rather than folders.

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 implies usage: an agent would call this when needing to enumerate folders. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as if only a specific folder is needed. This falls short of the explicit guidance seen in higher-scoring tools.

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