Get Folder Entities

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation and the scope is stated, but the description does not disclose pagination behavior (though page_token exists in the schema) or what happens for empty or invalid folders. It is adequate for a simple listing but omits some behavioral detail.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the action and enumerates the exact entity types covered, making it both compact and immediately informative.

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 straightforward listing tool with a 100%-covered schema and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It lacks only explicit mention of pagination or result size limits, but the page_token parameter already signals pagination to an agent.

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 parameters are already well-documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the fact that the listing is 'inside a folder,' which maps to folder_id. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific action ('List'), a precise resource scope ('tags, triggers and variables inside a folder'), and makes the tool's purpose immediately distinguishable from siblings like get_folder or list_tags. The verb+resource+scope pattern gives an agent a clear idea of what this tool does.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when you need to enumerate the tags, triggers, and variables within a specific folder. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to choose this over sibling list/get tools.

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