get_group_files_by_folder

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 states the operation (get file list) but doesn't disclose whether it's read-only, whether folder_id is required or optional, what happens if folder_id is omitted, or any pagination/recursion behavior. For a listing tool, this is a notable gap.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. It earns its place with no wasted words, though it could add a bit more context without becoming verbose.

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 annotations, no output schema, and a terse description, the tool lacks critical context. An agent doesn't know whether folder_id is optional, what the return format is, or how this differs from get_group_root_files. For a file-listing tool, this is incomplete.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds the context that the tool lists files in a folder, but it doesn't clarify the relationship between group_id and folder_id (e.g., whether folder_id is optional and defaults to root). Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Get file list in specified group folder' clearly states the action (get file list) and the resource (specified group folder). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_group_root_files (root files) and get_group_file_url (file URL), though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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?

The description implies usage for listing files in a group folder, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_group_root_files or get_group_file_system_info. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided.

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