Get Test Manager Folders by Project ID

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Describes returned data and usage but does not explicitly state it is a read-only, non-destructive operation or mention auth requirements or rate limits. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

Single paragraph, front-loaded with main purpose, then adds use cases and behavior. Some redundancy but overall informative and well-structured. Could be slightly more concise.

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, description thoroughly explains return fields (name, ID, description, parent, timestamps, test case counts) and their significance. Relates to sibling tools and provides actionable context. Complete for a simple tool.

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?

Only parameter is project_id, described in schema as string with minLength. Description mentions 'given the project's ID' but adds no further detail about expected format, source, or validation. With 0% schema coverage, more explicit guidance would be beneficial.

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 retrieves every folder in a LambdaTest Test Manager project by project ID, listing returned fields (name, ID, description, parent folder, timestamps, test case counts). It distinguishes from sibling tm.get_testCasesByFolderId by mentioning total counts including subfolders.

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 use cases: to see test case organization, find folder ID before adding test cases, spot count discrepancies. Also says 'Do not use this to fetch a single folder's details,' giving a clear exclusion. Lacks mention of alternative for single folder details but implied via siblings.

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