create-routine-folder

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 states the required input and return value including the new folder ID, but does not mention error conditions, permissions, or side effects beyond creation. For a simple create tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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 very concise, with three short sentences that front-load the main action and then provide necessary details. There is no wasted wording or repetition.

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 simple create tool with no output schema, the description covers the purpose, required parameter, and return value. It lacks edge-case or error behavior, but that is less critical for such a straightforward operation.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the 'name' parameter. The description mentions 'Requires a name for the folder,' which clarifies the parameter's role, but it does not add depth such as uniqueness, length constraints, or examples. It only partially compensates for the low coverage.

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 tool creates a new routine folder, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get-routine-folders by indicating a create operation, and there is no alternative creation tool for folders.

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 a new routine folder is needed but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions. No comparison with get-routine-folder or get-routine-folders is given, so usage context is only implied.

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