Update Subfolder

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: the required permission scopes, the confirm=true gate, and the caution that the action 'May share access, notify people or incur provider charges.'

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 purpose is front-loaded in one clean sentence, but the permission block restates the same idea three times (direct scope, delegated scope, expiring token) and inflates the definition well beyond what most calls need. Structured, but not tight.

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 an 8-param mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the critical gaps: permissions, the confirm gate, and downstream side effects. Only the absence of routing guidance to sibling tools keeps it from being fully complete.

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%, so the schema documents all eight parameters including the payload/payload_file alternatives and their constraints. The description names only name/description and adds no format or intent detail beyond the schema's baseline.

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 with the exact fields it mutates ('Updates a subfolder's name and/or description'), which cleanly separates it from update_folder, create_subfolder, and delete_subfolder. An agent can identify it without opening the schema.

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 prerequisite context (permission scopes and the confirm=true requirement) but never states when to prefer this over update_folder or get_subfolder, nor any exclusions. Usage is implied through prerequisites rather than explicit routing.

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