Delete Folder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does state that the operation deletes an existing folder and returns confirmation, which establishes the destructive nature. However, it does not disclose side effects such as whether child folders or contained documents are deleted, nor does it cover error behavior or permission requirements.

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 a single, clean sentence that front-loads the action and outcome. It contains no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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?

For a single-parameter destructive operation with an output schema, the description is minimally viable. It names the action, target, and return behavior. Yet with no annotations and many folder-related siblings, the lack of side-effect and routing guidance leaves a notable completeness gap.

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 needs to compensate, but it never explicitly explains folder_id beyond implying it identifies the folder to delete. The word 'existing' adds a small constraint, but there is no guidance on format, how to obtain the ID, or why an ID might be invalid.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete'), names the resource ('folder'), qualifies it as existing, and states the return expectation ('deletion confirmation'). It clearly distinguishes this from siblings like mendeley_delete_document and mendeley_remove_document_from_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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus mendeley_remove_document_from_folder, mendeley_rename_folder, or mendeley_delete_document. It also does not mention prerequisites such as whether the folder must be empty or what happens if the folder does not exist.

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