clickup_template_apply_folder

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that this is a creation operation ('Create a new folder'), specifies what gets created ('inherits the template's list structure, statuses, default fields, and other presets'), and indicates the return value ('Returns the created folder object'). However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or error conditions.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by usage guidance and return information. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words, making it efficient 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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description provides good context for a creation tool: purpose, usage, and return value. It could be more complete by addressing permissions or error handling, but it covers the essentials well for the tool's complexity.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema (e.g., it doesn't explain format constraints or provide examples). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific action ('Create a new folder'), the method ('by instantiating a saved folder template'), and what is inherited ('list structure, statuses, default fields, and other presets'). It distinguishes this from the sibling 'clickup_folder_create' by specifying template-based creation versus regular folder creation.

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 explicitly provides when to use this tool ('by instantiating a saved folder template') and names an alternative tool for discovery ('Use clickup_template_list to discover templates'). It also implies when not to use it (e.g., for non-template folder creation, use clickup_folder_create).

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