grafana_criar_pasta

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says nothing about required permissions, behavior on duplicate title/UID collisions, whether UID is auto-generated when omitted, or whether the operation is idempotent — all critical for a mutation tool.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, but the leading '62.' is a leftover numbering artifact that adds noise and looks like a stray list marker rather than intentional content.

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 need not be explained, but for an unannotated mutation tool the description should cover permissions, duplicate handling, and UID generation. None of that is present, leaving the definition thin against the tool's operational 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only restates that there is a title and an optional UID, adding no format rules, UID character constraints, or meaning of the default null beyond what the schema already shows.

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: creating a new Grafana folder, with the two inputs (title, optional UID) named. It is distinguishable from siblings like grafana_atualizar_pasta or grafana_excluir_pasta by the verb, though it never names them explicitly.

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?

No when-to-use, prerequisites, or alternatives are given. There is no mention of how this differs from grafana_atualizar_pasta or what to do if a folder with the same title already exists, leaving the agent to infer everything from the verb.

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