notes_create_folder

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states that creation happens and that account/parent targeting is possible, but it does not explain side effects, default account behavior, whether duplicate folder names are allowed, what happens if the parent folder does not exist, or any permission requirements.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences deliver the core purpose and key optional capabilities with no redundant or filler language. Every word adds meaning.

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 mutation tool with five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is too thin. It does not explain the default target account, whether parent folders can be created recursively, what the return value is, or how failures are surfaced. An agent would need significant additional assumptions to invoke it reliably in non-trivial cases.

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 must compensate for five undocumented parameters. It only mentions 'account' and 'parent folder' generically, but does not explain the relationship between account_id/account_name or parent_folder_id/parent_folder_name, which parameters take precedence, or how optional parameters behave when omitted.

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 a specific action and resource: 'Create a folder in Apple Notes.' It clearly differs from sibling tools like notes_create_note and notes_delete_folder because the object being acted on is a folder and the operation is creation.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives, nor does it mention any related tools such as notes_list_folders for finding parent folder IDs or notes_list_accounts for targeting an account. The usage context is only implied by the verb 'create.'

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