list_folders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context by stating that each folder appears with a video count and that the API term is 'projects'. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 one sentence with no filler. Every clause earns its place: the action, the resource, the output detail, and the API terminology note. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 read-only list operation, the description plus rich annotations cover the essential behavior and safety. It lacks explicit pagination/return-shape details and usage guidance, but the tool is low complexity and the schema provides defaults and constraints.

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%, and the description provides no parameter-level meaning. The schema exposes page, sort, per_page, and direction with types/defaults/enums, but the description does not clarify their semantics or how they affect the result. The description must compensate for low schema coverage and does not.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('your Vimeo folders'), and names the output value ('video count for each'). It also clarifies that folders are called 'projects' in the API, which is useful. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from get_folder, but the list/get distinction is reasonably evident from the verb and resource.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus get_folder, create_folder, or other folder-related tools. No exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative routing are mentioned. The agent must infer usage solely from the name and description.

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