delete_folder

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying that the tool fails if the folder is not empty (per RFC). Annotations already indicate destructiveness and idempotency, but the description provides the emptyness constraint and failure behavior, which is critical for correct invocation.

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 with no wasted words: action, resource, key constraint. Perfectly front-loaded and efficient.

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 has two parameters (one required) and an output schema, the description covers the core behavior but lacks parameter explanations and any prerequisites. It is adequate for a simple tool but could be more complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining parameter meaning, but it does not. The terms 'folder' and 'account' are not clarified (e.g., folder path, account identifier), leaving ambiguity for the agent.

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 'Delete an empty IMAP folder' with a specific verb and resource, and includes a distinguishing constraint (fails if not empty) that differentiates it from sibling folder operations like create_folder and rename_folder.

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 when the folder is empty but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it provide when-not or prerequisite conditions. The constraint 'fails if not empty' gives some guidance, but it lacks direct comparison to siblings.

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