Find Folder

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context about the tool's role as a resolver whose output feeds upload_file or MCP_DEFAULT_FOLDER, but it says nothing about failure behavior when a folder name is ambiguous or absent.

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?

Three short sentences with the purpose front-loaded and no filler; every sentence contributes either the return values, a use case, or an exclusion.

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?

With an output schema present, the description needn't explain return values, and annotations cover safety. What remains unaddressed is only edge behavior (not-found or multiple-match results), a minor gap for a single-parameter lookup tool.

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 folder parameter already documents all accepted forms (path, folder name, ID, URI). The description only restates the path-to-URI conversion, so it adds little beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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 ('look up a SAS Content folder') and enumerates the return values (ID, URI, name, full path). It also names the siblings it relates to (upload_file, rule set / decision creation tools), so an agent can place it precisely in the toolset.

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?

Gives two concrete trigger conditions — confirming a user-named folder before storing something there, and converting a path into a folder URI — plus an explicit when-not: rule set and decision creation tools take a path directly, so this lookup is unnecessary for them. That is a full when/when-not/alternative triad.

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