project.create_folder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. The description only states the action, with no mention of side effects, idempotency, error behavior, required permissions, or constraints like nesting limits. This is a severe gap.

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 brief (three words), but it is under-specified rather than efficiently concise. It fails to include necessary information that would justify its brevity. Every sentence should earn its place, but here essential context is missing.

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 the complexity (4 parameters, 2 required, no output schema, no annotations), the description is far from complete. It does not explain the concept of a project folder, the relationship to the project, or the meaning of parent_folder_id. The sibling tools provide context, but the description itself is inadequate.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain parameter semantics. It does not mention any of the four parameters: name, project_id, description, parent_folder_id. The agent gets no help understanding what these fields mean or how they affect the operation.

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 'Create project folder.' essentially restates the tool name 'project.create_folder'. It clarifies the action (create) and resource (folder in a project) but provides no differentiation from sibling tools like 'project.create_file' or 'project.create'. It is minimally clear but adds little value over the name.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, when to use this vs 'project.create_file' or how to handle prerequisites like an existing project. The description offers no usage context or exclusions.

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