list_folders

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It notes the read-only nature ('can read') and the output includes folder_id, which is useful. However, it does not describe pagination, ordering, or the full structure of the response, though the output schema likely covers that.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences. The first sentence states the core action and scope, and the second adds the key relationship to sibling tools, making every word useful. It is front-loaded with the main purpose.

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?

Given that the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's role in the workflow. It explains the dependency on folder_id for other tools, which is critical context. Minor gaps like pagination are not critical for a 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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema shows an empty properties object with 100% coverage. The description adds context by explaining the purpose of folder_id in the output, which is helpful for downstream usage. Since there are no parameters to document, a baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 lists library folders accessible to the account, with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning folder_id as a prerequisite for list_books and search_books, which is not evident from the name alone.

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 when to use this tool: before calling list_books or search_books, since it provides the required folder_id. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is clear given the sibling tools and the dependency.

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