Coda Delete Folder

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds genuinely useful context: 'Permanently removes the folder' and that contained docs 'may be moved to the root level or deleted depending on Coda's behavior.' The latter is a valuable behavioral disclosure about side effects beyond the annotation signal.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then the destructive warning, then the verification step. Mostly efficient, though the hedge 'depending on Coda's behavior' is slightly vague and adds uncertainty rather than precision.

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?

An output schema exists so return-value details are unnecessary, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description supplies the destruction warning, side-effect ambiguity, and a verification prerequisite, making it complete enough for correct invocation, with only minor residual ambiguity about doc handling.

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?

With a single parameter at 100% schema coverage, the schema fully documents folder_id ('The folder ID to delete'). The description adds only that confirmation includes folder_id, offering marginal value beyond structured data. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Delete a folder from the Coda workspace'), making it clearly distinguishable from other delete tools like coda_delete_doc or coda_delete_page. It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative, but the resource is unambiguous.

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 actionable pre-condition guidance: 'Verify the folder with coda_get_folder before deleting.' This directs the agent to a prerequisite step. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use framing, but the context is clear.

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