get_asset_folder

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature (implied by 'Get'), error handling, authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens if the ID is invalid. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('Get an asset folder by ID') with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool.

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, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values, error conditions, or behavioral context needed for effective use, especially compared to richer sibling tools like 'fetch_asset_folders'.

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?

The description adds meaning by specifying the parameter is an 'ID', which clarifies the purpose of 'asset_folder_id' beyond the schema's string type. With 0% schema description coverage and only one parameter, this adequately compensates, though it could detail ID format or constraints.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('asset folder'), specifying it retrieves by ID. It distinguishes from siblings like 'fetch_asset_folders' (plural) by focusing on a single folder, but doesn't explicitly contrast with 'get_asset' or other get_* tools.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'fetch_asset_folders' (for listing) or 'get_asset' (for individual assets). The description implies usage when you have a specific folder ID, but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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