clickup_folder_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It correctly indicates that the tool creates a folder and returns the created object including its id. However, it does not mention potential side effects, authorization requirements, rate limits, or error conditions (e.g., duplicate name, non-existent space).

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 two sentences long with no filler. It front-loads the core action and follows with useful context. While concise, it could benefit from slight restructuring (e.g., separating the usage note), but it is efficient and clear.

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 this is a simple create tool with only two parameters, the description is fairly complete. It covers the purpose, the return value (folder object with id), and provides a usage hint. It lacks details on error handling or response structure, but the absence of a output schema is partially mitigated by mentioning the return of the id.

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 input schema already provides clear descriptions for both parameters (name and space_id), achieving 100% coverage. The description adds value by explaining the role of folders (group lists, start empty) and how to use the returned folder_id with clickup_list_create, which goes beyond the schema.

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 action (create), the resource (folder), and the context (inside a ClickUp space). It also specifies that folders start empty and that lists can be added later via another tool. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like clickup_folder_list or clickup_folder_delete.

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 provides guidance on how to use the tool after creation (adding lists via clickup_list_create) and implies the folder's role as a container. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention prerequisites like the need for a valid space_id, though the schema provides that context.

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