project_folder_goto_parent

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core behavior (moving up one level) and the return values (True/False, including the edge case of already being at root). This is sufficient for a simple navigation tool, though it does not detail side effects or error conditions beyond the boolean return.

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 sentences: one for the action and one for the return values. Every word is useful, and it is front-loaded with the primary purpose. No redundancy or filler.

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 navigation tool with an output schema, the description fully covers what it does and what to expect in return. It includes the important edge case of being at the root, which is essential for correct invocation and interpretation.

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 and the schema is empty, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly notes the behavior and return values without needing any parameter documentation, as there are none.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Navigate up one level in the project database folder hierarchy.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings like project_folder_goto_root, which goes to the root rather than just one level up.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool (when needing to move to the parent folder), but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as 'use project_folder_goto_root for root.' It leaves the when-not-to-use to inference.

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