m365_contacts_folder_update

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

Annotations already label this as destructive and non-readonly; the description adds a useful scoping constraint ('top-level or direct-child'). However, it does not disclose behavioral details beyond that, such as conflict handling, reversibility, or side effects on child folders.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the core action. Every word earns its place; no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 a 4-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, this description is too minimal. It does not explain the relationship between rename and move parameters, whether they can be combined, or how to target top-level versus child folders, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 only 50% and the description does not compensate. While 'rename' implies displayName and 'move' implies moveToParentFolderId, the description provides no explicit mapping or usage semantics for any parameter, leaving folderId and parentFolderId entirely unexplained.

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 specific verbs 'Rename or move' with a resource 'top-level or direct-child contact folder,' clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create, delete, and list operations. The scope restriction adds further clarity.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The phrase 'top-level or direct-child' implies a constraint but does not explain how to determine eligibility or what other tools to use for non-matching folders.

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