create_folder

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose potential side effects, error conditions (e.g., duplicate folder names), permission requirements, or return behavior. Only the basic creation action is mentioned.

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 extremely concise and well-structured. The purpose is front-loaded, and the Args section directly clarifies the parameter. Every sentence serves a clear function with no unnecessary text.

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 tool with a single parameter and an output schema available, the description is largely sufficient. It clearly states the operation and parameter. While it could mention duplicate handling or permissions, these are minor gaps for a basic create 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?

The description includes an Args section explaining that 'name' is the name of the new folder ('Namn på den nya mappen'). This adds meaning beyond the schema, which only labels it as 'Name'. However, it does not provide additional details like allowed characters or length constraints.

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 tool's action: 'Skapa en ny mapp i brevlådan' (Create a new folder in the mailbox). It uses a specific verb and resource, and it is distinct from sibling tools like delete_folder or rename_folder.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or conditions. The description simply states what it does without contextualizing its use among siblings.

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