list_folders

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 explains the tool retrieves folders (implicitly read-only), describes the return fields, pagination behavior, and error scenarios. It does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive or safe, but the context implies it. A 5 would require an explicit read-only declaration.

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 long but well-structured into sections (Purpose, Parameters, Returns, Usage Examples, Best Practices, Common Errors, Related Tools). It front-loads the main purpose and remains readable. The length is justified by the comprehensiveness, but could be slightly trimmed without losing value.

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 provides detailed return fields (id, name, description, parent_id, timestamps) and their meanings. It covers error messages, best practices, and related tools comprehensively. All necessary information for correct invocation is present.

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%, but the description adds significant value beyond the schema: it explains the default and max values for size, provides usage examples with different parameter combinations, and ties parameters to pagination behavior. This enriches the agent's understanding of how to use parameters effectively.

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 it lists folders with pagination for organizing flows hierarchically. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_folder, get_folder, update_folder, delete_folder, and list_flows by specifying its role in discovery and obtaining folder IDs.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance (e.g., 'Call this before create_flow'), best practices (cache IDs, check parent_id), common errors with explanations, and a list of related tools with their purposes. This helps an agent decide when to invoke this tool over alternatives.

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