get_personal_folder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses that the tool returns the root folder including child items, which adds useful behavioral context. However, it does not explicitly state read-only semantics, authentication requirements, or potential errors, leaving some ambiguity for a getter with no annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and no wasted words. Each sentence adds meaningful information: what it returns and how to use the result.

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 parameterless getter with an output schema, the description is complete: it explains what the tool returns, the scope ('current user's personal'), and how to use the result. The output schema covers return structure, so no further detail is needed here.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description adds meaning by explaining the returned ID's purpose ('starting point to navigate the content library'), which helps the agent understand how to use the output even though there are no inputs.

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 specific action ('Get the current user's personal content folder') and distinguishes this from generic folder tools like get_folder by specifying 'personal' and 'current user's'. The verb and resource are explicit and unambiguous.

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool ('Use the returned ID as a starting point to navigate the content library'). It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like get_folder or get_content_by_path, but for a simple root-fetching tool this is sufficient guidance.

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