clickup_guest_share_folder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It discloses that the action grants access to all descendant lists and tasks, that it returns the updated guest object, and implies the Enterprise plan requirement. It does not address potential side effects like permission overrides, but the core behavior is transparent.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: the first defines the action and scope, the second provides alternatives and reversal, the third states plan requirement and return value. No redundant or vague wording.

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 no output schema, the description mentions the return value ('updated guest object') sufficiently. All three parameters are explained with sourcing guidance. The description covers purpose, usage, and result without missing critical details.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter already having a description. The tool description adds value by advising how to obtain each parameter (e.g., 'Obtain from clickup_folder_list (field: id)') and by clarifying that the permission value applies to every descendant, which is slightly more explicit than the schema's phrasing.

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: 'Grant a ClickUp guest user access to an entire folder — including all its lists and tasks — at a specified permission level.' It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning narrower-scope alternatives (clickup_guest_share_list, clickup_guest_share_task) and the revocation counterpart (clickup_guest_unshare_folder).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool (for folder-level access) and when to use alternatives (list or task sharing). It also mentions the Enterprise plan requirement and notes that the result is an updated guest object, which helps the agent decide invocation order.

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