List folders for a company item kind

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds the HTTP method (GET) and endpoint path, as well as the authorization class ('board_or_agent'), which provides useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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—two short sentences. The first line repeats the title but the second line provides valuable HTTP endpoint and auth info. No unnecessary words, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., separate sections).

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are covered. The description provides the endpoint and auth class, but fails to explain the two required parameters (companyId and kind) or differentiate from sibling tools. For a simple listing tool, this is adequate but incomplete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description should explain parameters but does not. It only hints at 'item kind' without explicitly naming the 'kind' parameter or its enum values (routine, skill). The companyId parameter is not mentioned at all.

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 states 'List folders for a company item kind', which clearly identifies the verb (list) and resource (folders). The title reinforces this. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling folder tools like create or delete, though the verb 'list' implies read-only.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pc_post_companies_by_company_id_folders (create) or pc_delete_companies_by_company_id_folders_by_folder_id (delete). The agent must infer from context.

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