list_folders

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions 'optional filters' without disclosing any behavioral traits such as pagination, limits, default behavior when no filters are applied, or whether the operation is read-only. This is a significant gap for a tool with five parameters.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it lacks structure or any additional details. While brevity is positive, it sacrifices necessary information.

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?

Given the five optional parameters and lack of annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return value format, even though an output schema exists. The tool is minimally viable but could benefit from clarifying scope and typical use 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%, and the description provides no explanation of the parameters. The agent must infer from parameter names like vcenter_name, folders, names, types, and datacenters, but the description adds no value beyond listing them as 'optional filters'.

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 'List folders with optional filters' clearly states the verb (list) and resource (folders), and hints at filtering. It differentiates from sibling tools like list_hosts or list_datacenters, but lacks specificity about what type of folders (e.g., VM folders, datastore folders) are being listed.

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. For example, it does not clarify if this should be used to filter folders for a specific vCenter or datacenter context. The description offers no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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