list_yandex_folders

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only adds the qualifier 'accessible' to convey access-based filtering, but fails to mention output format, pagination, ordering, or other behavioral traits. The 'List' verb implies read-only, but this is implicit.

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?

A single concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with no redundant information. It earns every word.

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 simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema) and clear sibling context, the description is largely complete. It could specify the return value (e.g., list of folder IDs and names) but this is not critical for a list operation and the overall context is sufficient.

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 description compensates for the 0% schema coverage by explaining the effect of the only parameter: cloud_id is used to specify the cloud scope. The phrase 'or all accessible folders' also implies the default behavior when the parameter is omitted, adding clear semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('folders'), and clarifies the scope ('specified cloud or all accessible folders'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_yandex_clouds (clouds) and get_folder_details_info (details of a single folder), though it could be more explicit about what a 'folder' is.

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 phrase 'in specified cloud or all accessible folders' directly communicates the two usage modes: provide a cloud_id to scope or omit it to list all accessible folders. It provides clear context but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool.

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