bookmarks_get_childrenRetrieve the direct bookmarks and subfolders of a Chrome bookmark folder in display order. Use a folder id to get a text or JSON list.
Return the direct children (folders and bookmarks) of a folder, in display order.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Folder id | |
| format | No | Output format: text = human-readable list, json = raw BookmarkTreeNode data | text |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and the description is consistent. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: children are returned directly, limited to immediate contents, and ordered by display order. This helps an agent predict actual behavior.
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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every part adds meaning: 'direct', 'folders and bookmarks', and 'display order'.
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 low-complexity, read-only tool with a complete parameter schemachers, the description is sufficient. It states what is returned. The format parameter's enum descriptions in the schema cover output representation, and readOnlyHint covers safety.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both id and format. The description does not add additional parameter details, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate because the structured schema carries the meaning.
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 operation ('Return'), the resource ('direct children ... of a folder'), and the scope ('direct children' not nested, 'folders and bookmarks'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like bookmarks_get_tree by emphasizing direct children only.
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 phrase 'direct children' implicitly tells an agent to use this when immediate descendants are needed, not the whole tree. However, it does not explicitly mention situations where bookmarks_get_tree or bookmarks_get should be preferred.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.