hudu_get_folderResolve a Hudu folder by ID, name, slug, or external ID, optionally scoped to a company; use expand to return the full folder record instead of a compact summary.
Resolve a folder from an id or name, optionally company-scoped; folders.get is cheaper for a known id. expand:true returns the full Folder.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| opts | No | ||
| identifier | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| found | Yes | ||
| record | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.6.0Input schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Input schema / properties / identifier / anyOfPrevious value: -[
- {
- "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
- "maximum": 9007199254740991,
- "type": "integer"
- },
- {
- "minLength": 1,
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "properties": {
- "domain": {
- "description": "Domain, for resources that have one.",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "external_id": {
- "description": "Vendor-side external id.",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "id": {
- "description": "Numeric id - the direct fetch.",
- "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
- "maximum": 9007199254740991,
- "type": "integer"
- },
- "name": {
- "description": "Exact name.",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "slug": {
- "description": "Exact slug.",
- "type": "string"
- }
- },
- "type": "object"
- }
-]New value: +[
+ {
+ "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ {
+ "minLength": 1,
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ {
+ "properties": {
+ "domain": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "external_id": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "slug": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+]Input schema / properties / identifier / descriptionRemoved value: -"Id, exact name/slug, or an identifier object."Input schema / properties / opts / properties / expand / descriptionPrevious value: -"Return the full typed records instead of the compact summaries (default false)."New value: +"Full records, not compact summaries."Output schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"v0.2.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that resolution accepts ids or names and that expand:true returns the full Folder rather than a summary, but says nothing about failure behavior when a name doesn't resolve or how company scoping is determined.
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 dense, front-loaded sentence; the verb and resource come first and the cheaper-alternative note follows. No filler, though the semicolon-chained clauses pack several ideas without clear separation.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and annotations cover the read-only nature. Still, the 'company-scoped' claim is unexplained and unmapped to any parameter, and the alternative identifier fields go unmentioned, leaving an agent to inspect the schema.
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% with a nested identifier object, so the description must carry the load. It only mentions 'id or name' while the schema also accepts slug, domain, and external_id, and it references 'company-scoped' even though no company parameter exists in the schema, leaving ambiguity.
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?
States a specific verb and resource: 'Resolve a folder from an id or name, optionally company-scoped.' It distinguishes itself from a cheaper alternative (folders.get) for known ids, which is genuine differentiation, though folders.get is not among the listed siblings so the contrast is somewhat abstract.
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?
Gives explicit routing guidance: use folders.get when the id is known because it is cheaper, and this tool resolves from id or name. That is a clear when-to-use condition, though it stops short of stating exclusions or prerequisites for the company-scoped case.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.