get_solution_folders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only repeats parameter meanings and does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination behavior (though page/per_page hints at it), ordering, error handling, or what happens if the category_id is invalid. The statement 'List all' could mislead without noting pagination.

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 appropriately sized: a single clear purpose sentence followed by a compact args list. Every sentence earns its place, and the structure is front-loaded with the main action.

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 simple paginated list tool with an output schema present, the description is minimally viable. It covers the core operation and arguments but lacks behavioral nuances like pagination defaults, ordering, or error scenarios. It is not rich, but it is not critically incomplete for a basic list operation.

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 0%, so the description's brief parameter explanations ('parent category ID', 'Page number', 'Results per page') add some meaning beyond the schema. However, they are extremely terse and do not provide details like allowed ranges, format, or relationships between parameters.

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'), the resource ('solution folders'), and the scoping ('in a category'). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_solution_folder_by_id (which fetches a single folder) and get_solution_categories (which lists categories).

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 implies usage: you need a category_id to list folders under it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool. The context is clear but no exclusions or comparisons are provided.

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