delete_reminder_folder

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing side effects. It explicitly warns that the operation deletes the list plus all contained reminders and that it 'cannot be undone,' which is essential for a destructive action. It lacks permission/authentication context, but the irreversibility caveat is strong.

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 well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and consequence. Every word contributes; no filler or repetition.

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 zero-parameter destructive operation with no output schema, the description is essentially complete: it identifies the target, the cascading effect, and irreversibility. It does not describe the return value, but for a delete operation with no parameterization this is a minor gap given other contextual richness.

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 takes zero parameters, so the schema fully covers all inputs (an empty object). There are no parameters to explain; the description's emphasis on the list-and-contents scope is more relevant than parameter semantics. Baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly identifies the destructive action ('Deletes'), the target resource ('Apple Reminders list'), and the cascading scope ('and all reminders inside it'). Distinguishes itself from sibling 'delete_reminder' which targets a single reminder, and 'rename_reminder_folder' which mutates rather than deletes.

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?

Description does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives such as 'delete_reminder' or 'complete_reminder'. The scoping phrase implies it is for whole-list deletion, but no explicit guidance or exclusion criteria are provided.

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