list_bookmarks

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose read-only behavior, whether subfolders are included recursively, how limit interacts with many bookmarks, or what happens when folder_path is null (though the schema does). The description only restates the core purpose, adding minimal behavioral context.

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 immediately conveys the tool's function. Every word is purposeful, and it is well-structured.

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?

The schema and output schema cover the parameter and return details, so the description is not required to repeat them. However, the tool sits among several bookmark-related siblings, and the description fails to provide context about when this listing approach is preferred over searching or browsing recent bookmarks. It is minimally complete but lacks sibling differentiation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description mentions 'specified folder' which aligns with folder_path but adds no additional meaning or syntax tips beyond the schema.

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 action ('list') and the resource ('bookmarks'), with a specific scoping condition ('under specified folder'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like search_bookmarks, recent_bookmarks, and list_folders by focusing on folder-filtered listing.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that search_bookmarks might be better for keyword filtering, or that list_folders can be used to discover valid folder paths. The context is implied but not explicitly stated.

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