get_series_by_id_folder

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond those annotations – it does not mention return format, potential side effects, or any constraints. For a simple read operation this is acceptable but still minimal.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than concise efficiency. It front-loads the endpoint but provides no explanatory value. Every word is wasted on repeating what the name already says.

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 the tool's low complexity (single integer parameter, read-only operation, output schema present), a terse description might suffice if the resource were obvious. However, 'SeriesFolder' is ambiguous, and the description fails to explain what it returns or when to use it. The output schema exists but does not compensate for the lack of purpose context.

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 only parameter, id, has zero schema description coverage. The description merely labels it as 'Path parameter', which adds no semantic meaning. It does not clarify that the id refers to a series ID or what value it expects beyond being an integer. The agent must guess from the tool name.

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 'Read SeriesFolder' which is a verb and resource, but it is essentially a restatement of the tool name. It does not clarify what a SeriesFolder is or how it differs from get_series_by_id. The endpoint path adds some context but the description itself is tautological.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling get_*_by_id tools. No mention of when fetching a folder is appropriate or what distinguishes it from fetching the series itself. The agent is left to infer usage entirely from the name.

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