folders.list

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explicitly states read-only, no side effects, auth, or rate limits, and discloses the throw condition for unknown project_id. It also describes the return format (relative paths). This is thorough and goes beyond typical.

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 well-structured sentences: first states purpose and output, second covers behavior and usage guidance. No wasted words, and the key distinction (relative paths) is front-loaded.

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 single-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description fully explains what it returns, when to use it, and its edge cases. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already describes the parameter ('Pass null or omit to list KB folders'). The description adds the throw condition for unknown project_id, which is behavioral rather than semantic. Baseline 3 applies because schema handles the meaning.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List folder paths') with explicit scoping (project root or Knowledge Base), and distinguishes from sibling tools like folders.create and files.create. The output shape is also given, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly says when to use this tool (discover where to drop a new file via files.create's folder argument, navigate vault structure) and when not to (use folders.create to actually create a folder). Names the relevant sibling and the condition that selects it.

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