List Postman Collection Folders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by noting the output fields (name, id, path, request count) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination or error behavior. Given the strong annotation coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core function and output fields, followed by a single usage context. No unnecessary words or repetition of schema details.

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 tool with one well-schema'd parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it lists, what fields are returned, and when to use it. It could mention potential limitations (e.g., no filtering) but is complete for the agent's selection and invocation needs.

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 100% because the single 'collection' parameter is thoroughly described in the schema as a Postman collection v2.1 JSON object. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, aligning with the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool lists folders in a Postman collection and specifies the returned fields (name, id, path, request count). This distinct verb+resource combination differentiates it from sibling tools like run_folder and preview_requests.

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?

The description provides explicit usage context: 'Use to confirm the folder created for a Jira ticket before running it.' This tells the agent when to invoke the tool relative to running a folder. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternatives, but the guidance is clear.

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