list_folders

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List all folders' without mentioning whether this includes nested folders, any ordering, or what the return format looks like. It does not contradict any annotation, but it lacks basic behavioral context such as read-only nature or potential side effects.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence: 'List all folders in the workspace'. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy. It is optimally concise.

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 simple tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description clearly states the action and scope. It is minimally complete, though a brief note on the return structure (e.g., an array of folder names) would make it fully self-explanatory. The lack of such detail prevents a perfect score.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it adds no conflicting information. It is sufficient given there is nothing to document.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'folders' and scopes it to 'the workspace', clearly distinguishing this tool from document-related siblings like list_documents and get_document. There is no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 tool's purpose is clear from the description, so when to use it is implied (when you need to enumerate folders). However, it provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives, such as mentioning that other tools handle documents or context. The absence of exclusions makes it adequate but not explicit.

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