List all folders in a Keep It library to navigate and organize notes and documents.
List all folders in Keep It.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "keepit_list_folders"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, and it says nothing about read-only safety, pagination, ordering, or what a folder entry contains. For a no-argument listing tool the risk is low, but the description adds no behavioral context whatsoever.
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?
One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is appropriately sized for a zero-argument list tool. It is efficient but so terse that it borders on under-specification rather than earning a top score.
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 trivial zero-param lister with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but leaves the return shape (what fields a folder has, ordering, whether nested folders appear) entirely unspecified.
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 defines zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to document and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies no arguments are needed.
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 names a specific verb and resource ('List all folders') and scopes it to the Keep It app, so the agent knows exactly what it returns. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the similar list-style siblings (keepit_list_bundles, keepit_list_tags) or explain what a 'folder' is versus those other containers.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives, even though three sibling tools (keepit_list_bundles, keepit_list_tags, keepit_search_items) also enumerate entities. The agent must infer on its own when folders are the right enumeration to request.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.