quip_browse_folder_tree

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the recursive browsing behavior and tree-shaped output, which is helpful. However, it does not mention performance implications for large hierarchies, error behavior for invalid folder IDs, or explicitly confirm read-only semantics. 'Browse' implies non-mutating, but it's not explicit.

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 sentence that front-loads the main verb and object, followed by clarifying details about the output. Every word earns its place, with 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?

The tool is simple with only two parameters and no output schema. The description adequately covers the purpose, the recursive nature, and the tree output format. It does not explain edge cases, but for a browse operation with complete schema coverage, this is sufficient.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage): folder_id as 'The ID of the root folder to browse' and max_depth with a default of 3. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline without enriching parameter understanding.

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 states 'Recursively browse a Quip folder hierarchy' with a specific verb and resource, and explicitly mentions the output as an 'indented tree'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like quip_get_folder, quip_get_document, and quip_search, which focus on retrieving individual items.

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 recursive and tree-oriented wording implies usage when you need to explore the full hierarchy rather than fetch a single item, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or list any exclusions. The guidance is implied rather than stated.

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