Create a folder in the executor workspace (UNC makefolder)

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

Goes well past the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true) by disclosing exact error payloads, that calls are type-guarded and pcall-wrapped, that a missing makefolder yields a specific error object, and that creating an existing folder is a no-op on most executors. This is rich behavioral context an agent cannot get from the structured fields.

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?

Front-loads purpose and the key workspace-scope caveat, then packs prerequisites and error behavior efficiently. It is dense with metadata-style fields (Phase, cost, idempotency, Capabilities, Produces) that read as boilerplate, costing some crispness.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return contract itself ({ path, ok = true } or { error }) and specifies failure modes and approval requirements. An agent has everything needed to invoke and interpret the call.

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%, so path, timeoutMs, and threadContext are already documented. The description restates the signature and clarifies the path is relative to the executor workspace, which adds marginal value but no syntax or format detail beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Create a folder') with explicit scope: the executor's workspace, not the Roblox game, and it creates required parent folders. This distinguishes it cleanly from siblings like create-instance or write-file, which target different resources.

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 concrete prerequisites ('Requires: active-client, resolved-target, explicit-mutation-approval'), a phase ('act'), and a verification step ('Verify with: file-exists'). It does not, however, name sibling alternatives (e.g., write-file vs. make-folder) or exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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